.On October  27, 1952, herein respondent  Octaviano Pabalan filed an application with the Public Service Commission to operate an  auto-truck service with  four jeepneys on the following lines: Calamba-College via Los  Banos, Calamba-Tanauan  (Batangas)  and Calamba-Canlubaiig (Laguna).

The  herein  petitioners,  Laguna Tayabas Bus Go.  and Batangas Transportation Co, filed opposition to the application  on the  ground that they are now. operating more than enough buses on the lines applied for by the applicant; that the Honorable Commission has already  granted various operators several certificates of public  convenience on the routes sought which are sufficient to serve  the people and  that any grant in favor  of the applicant of a  new certificate of public convenience to operate an auto-truck service along the lines mentioned in the application would create ruinous competition to the oppositors and the other operators.

After hearing, the Public Service Commission rendered a decision, the  dispositive part  of  which  is as follows:

"In view of the foregoing considerations,  the opposition  filed by the Laguna Tayabas Bus Company and Batangas Transportation Company is hereby overruled, and it appearing  from the evidence that  applicant is a Filipino citizen  and is financially capable to operate  and maintain  the proposed service, and  that the approval of this  application will promote public convenience  and interests in a proper and suitable  manner, it is ordered that, under the provisions of Section 15 of Commonwealth Act  No. 146, as amended, the certificate of public convenience  applied for be  issued to the applicant * *  *."

Not  satisfied  with this  decision, the petitioners  have appealed to  this Court contending that the Public Service Commission erred:  (1)  in not holding  that the  granting of a new certificate on the  lines applied for by applicant (respondent)  would only  create  ruinous competition  to the  herein petitioners and other operators of said lines; (2)  in holding that public convenience  and necessity will be  served  by  the  approval  of respondent's   application because the evidence in  this  case does not warrant the finding that there was or there is any need for the service sought for in the application;  (3)  in not  giving the  petitioners  preference  in the granting of  new units on the lines in question; "and (4)  in not denying the application of the respondent  in so  far as the  lines  covered by the application  of  the  respondent are  concerned,  and  in not sustaining petitioner's opposition thereto.

Errors 1, 2  and 3 essentially raise the issue that the evidence in the  case does not  warrant the  finding  that there  was need for the service  sought for in  the application and that the  grant  of a new certificate  in  favor of the  applicant  would create ruinous competition to the oppositors.   But we  find that  during the  hearing of the case  before the  Public  Service Commission,  the parties introduced  their  respective evidence and, after mature consideration thereof, the Public Service Commission rendered its decision containing the following findings of fact:

(a)  "It appears  from the evidence presented  by the  applicant that he proposes to operate one unit on  the  line Calamba-Collega via Los  Banos,  two units  on  the  line  Calamba-Tanauan, and  one unit on the  line Calamba-Canlubang;  that  he  has already acquired the four units  which he proposed to  operate as shown by  the certified  copies  of  the  certificates  of  registration marked  Exhibits "C", "C~l", "C-2" and "C-8"; that the trucks  operating  on these  lines  are usually filled to capacity and  there are many passengers "who cannot be accommodated by the present transportation facilities; that there are also many passengers on the line Calamba-Canlubang  because of the  cadre of  the Second Military Area and the families of the  soldiers living in  the  camp often travel to and from this area; that on the Calamba-College line the Laguna Tayabas  Bus Company operates  only one truck;  and  that the Batatas  Transportation  Company operates  express  trucks  which do not pick up passengers in the barrios along the lines in question.

(b)  "Staff Sergeant  Lorenzo  Komabiles,  traffic officer of  the Philippine Constabulary  of the province of Laguna, stationed at Los Banos, furthermore testified that according to his personal observation, there is  a heavy volume  of  passengers riding in the buses and jeepneys operating  on the lines  Calamba-Canlubang; that  he has apprehended many TPTJ  jeepneys and buses as well as. auto-calesas for  overloading, that  there are plenty of passengers  between Calamba and Canlubang because there is an army installation, Camp  Vicente Lim, 'where  there  are about one  thousand soldiers living with their families; and that there are  more than two thousand persons employed in the Canlubang Estate who need additional transportation facilities  on  the lines herein applied for.  .

(c) "On the other hand,  the oppositora submitted evidence tending to show that their buses operating on the lines covered  by  the present application  can  accommodate  all the passerigers; that rthe average passenger load  of  their buses is less than the  authorized maximum passenger capacity of the  said  buses  as shown by the reports of its inspectors marked Exhibits  "1", "2", and "3";  that aside  from the buses of the oppositors, there are also other TPU auto-trucks and auto-calesas operating along those lines as shown  by the census  taken by  the inspectors of  the Laguna Tayabas Bua Company and presented in evidence as Exhibits "4", "4-a" to "4~d", Exhibits "5", "5-a", to "6-e", Exhibits 6,  6-a to 6-d; and that the oppositors have suffered losses in the operation  of their: San Pablo-Manila line, Tanauan-Calamba line and Calamba-Canlubang . line as shown, by their monthly operation reports for  March  and April, 1953, marked as Exhibits "7" and "7-a" respectively.

(d) "After a careful consideration of the evidence submitted by both parties and the records of this Commission on authorized auto-truck services on the lilies herein applied for, we are of the opinion that public convenience  and necessity will  be served by the approval of this application inasmuch as the  service being rendered by the oppositors on the lines in  question  is inadequate to meet the needs  of the  inhabitants for a  local service which applicant proposes to operate."

As could be seen,  the decision appealed from is predicated on  the  evidence presented at the  trial of the case, which the Public Service Commission found to be in  favor of the respondent; consequently, the same should not be disturbed, for in several decisions  we have already held that "this  Court  would  not unduly  interfere  with the Commission "or  attempt to substitute its  judgment for the judgment of the Commission if there be evidence before it  reasonably supporting its order.

Under the third assignment of error, petitioners strongly urge that the Public Service Commission should not have granted  the  application  but  should  have  required the oppositors to increase their service on  the lines applied for by the new  applicant, being old and established operators on the said  lines.   This contention,  however, was not pleaded by  the petitioners in their  opposition to the application; it was not raised during  the hearing of the case,  and it is  only  raised now in this  appeal, hence  it cannot be properly entertained by this Court.

Wherefore,  finding no  errors  in the decision appealed from, the same  is hereby affirmed, wi|h  costs against the oppositors, herein petitioners.

Paras, G. J., Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion,  and Reyes, J. B. L., JJ., concur.