Title
Batangas Transportation Co. vs. Laguna Transportation Co.
Case
G.R. No. L-9185
Decision Date
Dec 27, 1958
Laguna Transportation sought additional trips due to overcrowding; opponents claimed existing services were sufficient. PSC and Supreme Court ruled in favor, citing public necessity and insufficient evidence from opponents.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-9185)

Facts:

  1. Application for Additional Trips: Laguna Transportation Company (respondent) applied to the Public Service Commission (PSC) for three additional round trips from Pagsanjan, Laguna to Manila and three additional round trips from Batangas Piers to Manila.
  2. Opposition by Petitioners: Batangas Transportation Company and Laguna-Tayabas Bus Company opposed the application, arguing that their existing services on the Pagsanjan-Manila and Batangas Piers-Manila routes were sufficient to meet passenger demand.
  3. Evidence Presented by Respondent:
    • Passengers at Pagsanjan faced difficulties boarding buses as buses from Sta. Maria, Paete, and other southern points were already full upon reaching Pagsanjan.
    • Residents of Pagsanjan desired early morning trips to Manila to conduct business and return the same day.
    • Buses from Batangas Piers were insufficient to accommodate passengers arriving from Mindoro.
    • Residents of Lobo, Lipa City, Malvar, and San Jose faced challenges boarding buses due to overcrowding.
  4. Evidence Presented by Petitioners:
    • Existing services were adequate, and there was no significant traffic to justify additional trips.
    • Petitioners suffered financial losses on the Pagsanjan-Manila and Batangas Piers-Manila routes.
    • Respondent allegedly cut trips from Batangas Piers to Manila, operating only up to Batangas poblacion.
  5. PSC Findings:
    • The PSC found that the respondent provided sufficient evidence to justify the need for additional trips.
    • The reduction of trips by other operators (e.g., Binan Transportation Company and Maria Ruiz) created a gap in service.
    • The PSC noted that the interval between trips on the Batangas Piers-Manila route was 50 minutes, and on the Pagsanjan-Manila route, it was over 10 minutes, indicating room for additional trips.

Issue:

  1. Whether the PSC erred in disregarding the petitioners' evidence, including:
    • Reports from PSC agents showing that buses operated below 50% capacity.
    • Petitioners' claims of financial losses.
    • Allegations of cut-throat competition among operators.
    • Testimony that respondent cut trips from Batangas Piers to Manila.
  2. Whether the PSC's decision to grant additional trips was supported by sufficient evidence.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.