You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1eba?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[MATIAS A. FERNANDO v. GUZCO TRANSIT](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1eba?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c1eba}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 34538, Dec 05, 1931 ]

MATIAS A. FERNANDO v. GUZCO TRANSIT +

DECISION

G. R. No. 34538

[ G. R. No. 34538, December 05, 1931 ]

MATIAS A. FERNANDO, PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. GUZCO TRANSIT, RESPONDENT AND APPELLEE.

D E C I S I O N

MALCOLM, J.:

Before the Public Service Commission,  the  Guzco Transit Company asked for authority to increase the hours of service on the Norzagaray-Manila line,  but  was only partially successful since the commissioner conceded to the applicant the only disposable hours, which were 12:00 noon from Norzagaray and 5:30 P. M., from  Manila.  The two errors assigned on appeal on behalf of Matias A. Fernando, the oppositor, attack the justice of the above-mentioned concession to the Guzco Transit Company.   However, no time need be consumed in consideration  of the appeal, for the reason that there is evidence in the record reasonably supporting the findings of the commissioner, and for the further very obvious reason that details of administration such as the granting of permission for additional service to operators naturally lie within the discretionary powers of the Public Service Commission. The petition for review is totally without merit.

Decision and order affirmed,  with the  costs of this instance against the petitioner.

Ten days from the publication of this  decision, judgment will be entered, and five days thereafter,  the record will he remanded to the court below.

Avanceña,  C. J., Street, Romualdez,  and Imperial,  JJ., concur.

tags