Case Digest (G.R. No. L-18390)
Facts:
Pedro J. Velasco v. Manila Electric Co., G.R. No. L-18390. August 06, 1971, the Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, J.B.L., J., writing for the Court. Plaintiff-appellant Pedro J. Velasco bought three adjoining lots in Diliman, Quezon City in 1948, sold two to Manila Electric Company (Meralco) and kept the third, on which he built his residence in a zone designated for first residence use. In September 1953 Meralco constructed a substation at the corner of South D and South 6 Streets and completed it in November 1953; the installation reduced high-voltage supply for thousands of customers and was built without prior building permit or authority from the Public Service Commission.Velasco alleged that since 1954 the substation emitted a continuous humming/drone that disturbed his sleep, impaired his health and reduced his property value; he sued for abatement of the alleged nuisance and for damages (including moral, exemplary and attorney’s fees) under Articles 694 and 2202 of the Civil Code. The City Engineer, Anastacio A. Agan, was impleaded as a co-defendant for allegedly failing to require a permit and to initiate remedial action.
The Court of First Instance of Rizal, Quezon City Branch (Civil Case No. 1355) dismissed Velasco’s complaint, finding the noise unavoidable and not constituting a nuisance and that claimed damages were not proven. Velasco brought a direct appeal to the Supreme Court (a direct appeal permitted prior to R.A. 5440). On appeal the Supreme Court reviewed testimonial descriptions, objective sound-level measurements by...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does the sound emitted by Meralco’s substation constitute an actionable nuisance under Article 694 of the Civil Code?
- Is plaintiff-appellant entitled to damages, and if so in what amount?
- May Anastacio A. Agan, City Engineer of Quezon City, be held solidarily liable with Meralco for th...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)