Title
Manila Electric Co. vs. Castillo
Case
G.R. No. 182976
Decision Date
Jan 14, 2013
Meralco disconnected Permanent Light's power over alleged meter tampering without due process; courts ruled defective meter caused inflated bills, awarding damages to respondents.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 128066)

Applicable Law

This case operates under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, with particular reference to Republic Act No. 7832, which addresses the illegal use of electricity and mandates specific procedures for the disconnection of electricity due to meter tampering.

Factual Background

The dispute began with Meralco's inspection of the respondents' electric meter on April 19, 1994, which they alleged was tampered with. Following this accusation, Meralco disconnected the electricity supply without prior written notice, citing losses from the alleged tampering.

Procedural History

The respondents filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City seeking an injunction against the disconnection, reimbursement for overpaid electric bills, and the reinstatement of their original meter. The RTC granted a preliminary injunction against Meralco and ultimately ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering Meralco to pay damages.

Trial Court Decision

On July 9, 2003, the RTC found that Meralco had violated due process by disconnecting the electric service without proper legal procedure. The court highlighted that, per RA 7832, the presence of a legitimate officer from the Energy Regulatory Board (ERB) during the discovery of the tampered meter was necessary for prima facie evidence of illegal use. Consequently, the RTC awarded the respondents substantial damages for the overpayments and mental anguish caused by the wrongful disconnection.

Court of Appeals Ruling

On May 21, 2008, the Court of Appeals modified the RTC's ruling, deleting the reimbursement for the overpayments but granting the respondents temperate damages of P500,000. The appellate court affirmed that Meralco had abused its right to disconnect the electricity service without providing the required notice, as mandated by Section 97 of the Revised Order No. 1 under the Public Service Commission regulations.

Petitioner’s Arguments

Meralco contested the awards of moral and exemplary damages, arguing that the disconnection for one day did not significantly affect the respondents’ operations, as they utilized generators immediately following the disconnection. Moreover, Meralco asserted that its personnel were justified in their actions based on the evidence of meter tampering.

Respondents’ Counterarguments

The respondents maintained that they were not involved in tampering with the meter and emphasized that the utility company’s actions lacked due process. They highlighted the significant increase in electric bills following the installation of a new meter as evidence of overbilling, asserting their claim for actual damages.

Legal Analysis

The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of due process in electric service disconnection, reinforcing the requirement for prior written notice to customers even in cases of suspected fraud. The Court also pointed out that the absence of an ERB representative during the discovery of the alleged tampering invalid

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.