Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1933 > September 1933 Decisions > G.R. No. 39453 September 15, 1933 - METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

058 Phil 402:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 39453. September 15, 1933.]

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT, Petitioner, v. THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and SABINO PADILLA, Respondents.

Modesto Villalobos, for Petitioner.

Benedicto Padilla, for Respondents.

SYLLABUS


1. PUBLIC SERVICES; METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT; INSPECTION AND REPAIR OF WATER METERS. — The Metropolitan Water District being vested with legal power to prescribe the procedure to be followed relative to inspection and repair of water meters, in the absence of evidence showing that such rules and regulations are unreasonable and unjust, the Public Commission has no authority to change them.


D E C I S I O N


VILLA-REAL, J.:


This is a petition filed by the Metropolitan Water District to review the judgment rendered by the Public Service Commission amending the former’s rules and regulations regarding inspection and repair of water meters as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"We believe that, in order to avoid complaints and suspicion on the part of the consumers, every water meter should be tested at the place where it is installed before its removal for repairs to the respondent’s shops on Arroceros Street; and that after repair and reinstallation thereof, another test should be made to ascertain if it is registering correctly, such tests in both instances to be made in the presence of the owner of the property or his duly authorized representative. In this manner, the interests of both parties are duly safeguarded. In both instances, it is also incumbent upon the respondent to send by messenger, in order to insure receipt thereof by the consumer, a written notice sufficiently in advance of the proposed test of the water meter and removal thereof, if necessary, as well as of the reinstallation and retest to be made, and this procedure shall invariably be followed by the respondent in the above-mentioned cases.

"Any regulation of the respondent entity, in conflict with the ruling laid down in this decision is hereby amended in accordance therewith.

"This decision shall take effect immediately and shall become final 30 days after the receipt of the notice hereof by the interested parties."cralaw virtua1aw library

In the case of the Metropolitan Water District v. Public Utility Commission (46 Phil., 412), this court held:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"2. METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT; ESTABLISHMENT OF RATES FOR MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF METERS AND PIPE LINES; POWER OF DISTRICT BOARD. — The District Board of the Metropolitan Water District has power to prescribe uniform rates for the maintenance and upkeep of the meters and connecting pipe lines belonging to consumers of the waters supplied by said Water District."cralaw virtua1aw library

The complaint filed by Judge Sabino Padilla consists in that when he received the notice to the effect that the water meter installed at his wife’s house at No. 132 Juan Luna was to be tested on November 29, 1932, the test had already been made and the meter in question had been removed to the repair shops of the Metropolitan Water District. He also alleged that the same irregularity had likewise been committed in other buildings belonging to his wife.

The fact that on various occasions the notices sent to Judge Sabino Padilla were received by him after the date set therein for the test and even after the test in question had already been made, does not render the rules and regulations of the respondent Metropolitan Water District regarding inspection, testing and repair of meters, unreasonable. At most, it constitutes either negligence on the part of the person in charge of sending out the notices, or delay in the mail, or failure on the part of the person who received the letter in the house of the addressee, to deliver it promptly. These defects may be corrected by filing a complaint with the Director of the Metropolitan Water District or with the Director of Posts, as the case may be.

The Metropolitan Water District being vested with legal power to prescribe the procedure to be followed relative to inspection and repair of water meters, in the absence of evidence showing that such rules and regulations are unreasonable and unjust, the Public Service Commission has no authority to change them.

In view of the foregoing, the judgment appealed from is hereby reversed, without special pronouncement as to costs. So ordered.

Malcolm, Abad Santos, Hull and Imperial, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






September-1933 Jurisprudence                 

  • C. E. PIATT v. PERFECTO ABORDO September 1, 1933 - 058 Phil 350

  • G.R. No. 38561 September 5, 1933 - FERNANDO ENRIQUEZ v. PAMPANGA BUS CO., INC.

    058 Phil 353

  • G.R. No. 37850 September 6, 1933 - MAN SHUNG LOONG CO., ET AL. v. MELECIO FABROS, ET AL.

    058 Phil 354

  • G.R. No. 40235 September 6, 1933 - MARIANO CU UNJIENG, ET AL. v. JUAN POSADAS, ET AL.

    058 Phil 360

  • JOSE R. PAÑGANIBAN v. ELIAS BORROMEO September 9, 1933 - 058 Phil 367

  • G.R. No. 40133 September 12, 1933 - ROBERT B. VAN STAVERN v. PEDRO MA. SISON, ET AL.

    058 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. 39925 September 14, 1933 - VALENTIN MONTOJO v. CEFERINO HILARIO, ET AL.

    058 Phil 373

  • G.R. No. 39929 September 14, 1933 - AGAPITO RAMOS v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF TAYABAS, ET AL.

    058 Phil 374

  • G.R. No. 40054 September 14, 1933 - LA GRANJA, INC. v. FELIX SAMSON, ET AL.

    058 Phil 378

  • G.R. No. 38190 September 15, 1933 - MANILA YELLOW TAXICAB CO., INC. v. FRANCISCO JAVIER

    058 Phil 381

  • G.R. No. 38286 September 15, 1933 - MANILA YELLOW TAXICAB CO., INC. v. FAUSTO BARREDO

    058 Phil 385

  • G.R. No. 38621 September 15, 1933 - EULALIO POSAS v. TOLEDO TRANSPORTATION CO., INC.

    058 Phil 390

  • G.R. No. 38715 September 15, 1933 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARTIN NOYNAY, ET AL.

    058 Phil 393

  • G.R. No. 38814 September 15, 1933 - METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

    058 Phil 397

  • G.R. No. 39453 September 15, 1933 - METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

    058 Phil 402

  • G.R. No. 37265 September 18, 1933 - CHINA BANKING CORPORATION v. CHAN QUAN PANG, ET AL.

    058 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. 38614 September 18, 1933 - MIGUEL R. MATEO v. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY

    058 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. 39955 September 18, 1933 - ANGELES TAPIA VIUDA DE JONES v. FRANCISCO ZANDUETA, ET AL.

    058 Phil 411

  • G.R. No. 37046 September 19, 1933 - IÑIGO S. DAZA v. FELISA TOMACRUZ, ET AL.

    058 Phil 414

  • G.R. No. 37310 September 19, 1933 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DONATO DAZO, ET AL.

    058 Phil 420

  • G.R. No. 37386 September 19, 1933 - ANDRES JAYME v. BUALAN

    058 Phil 422

  • G.R. No. 38435 September 19, 1933 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMILIO ORONGAN, ET AL.

    058 Phil 426

  • G.R. Nos. 39609 & 39643-39649 September 20, 1933 - MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY v. CATALINO BALAGTAS

    058 Phil 429

  • G.R. No. 36602 September 22, 1933 - CARMEN PARDO DE TAVERA v. PAZ repuLOPEZ MANZANO VIUDA DE PARDO DE TAVERA

    058 Phil 436

  • G.R. No. 37206 September 22, 1933 - CU UNJIENG E HIJOS v. MABALACAT SUGAR COMPANY, ET AL.

    058 Phil 439

  • G.R. No. 37874 September 22, 1933 - BRAULIO BALAGTAS ET AL. v. CIRIACA ARGUELLES

    058 Phil 445

  • G.R. No. 38050 September 22, 1933 - TIBURCIA MANAHAN v. ENGRACIA MANAHAN

    058 Phil 448

  • G.R. No. 39260 September 23, 1933 - JOSE P. BANZON, ET AL. v. GEORGE C. SELLNER

    058 Phil 453

  • G.R. No. 40368 September 23, 1933 - ANACLETO PIIT v. VICENTE B. DE LARA

    058 Phil 457

  • G.R. No. 36911 September 25, 1933 - AURELIA CONTUAN v. FORTUNATA RAMIREZ

    058 Phil 458

  • G.R. No. 38884 September 26, 1933 - PACIFICO ABAD ET AL. v. JUAN N. EVANGELISTA

    058 Phil 461

  • G.R. No. 37078 September 27, 1933 - ENRIQUE MONSERRAT v. CARLOS G. CERON, ET AL.

    058 Phil 469

  • G.R. No. 37706 September 27, 1933 - CU UNJIENG E HIJOS v. L. P. MITCHELL

    058 Phil 476

  • G.R. No. 38284 September 27, 1933 - GUILLERMO A. CU UNJIENG, ET AL. v. LEONARD S. GODDARD, ET AL.

    058 Phil 482

  • G.R. No. 38316 September 27, 1933 - GUILLERMO A. CU UNJIENG, ET AL. v. MARIANO A. ALBERT, ET AL.

    058 Phil 495

  • G.R. No. 39085 September 27, 1933 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO YABUT

    058 Phil 499

  • G.R. No. 39562 September 27, 1933 - JUAN L. ORBETA v. FILEMON SOTTO, ET AL.

    058 Phil 505

  • G.R. No. 37125 September 30, 1933 - MARIA ARRIETE v. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, ET AL.

    058 Phil 507