Subject: Article ___, NCC

Manila Electric Company, et. al. vs. The Court of Appeals

No. L-39019 January 22, 1988
Yap, J:

Facts:

Regional Trial Court rendered a decision in an action for recovery of damages for
embarrassment, humiliation, wounded feelings and hurt pride caused by the herein
petitioner, Manila Electric Company (MERALCO). The trial court order for the payment
of moral damages, exemplary damages and payment of attorney’s fee which was
affirmed in toto by the Court of Appeals.

Private respondents, Sps. Isaac Chaves and Juana O. Chaves entered into
contract for electrical service between the MERALCO, but on April 21, 1965 the
petitioner caused the electric service of the private respondent to be discontinued and
power line cut off without due notice.

Issue:

WON, the private respondents are entitled to moral damages?

Ruling:
Yes, respondent Court of Appeals committed no grave abuse of discretion in
affirming trial’ courts decision for ordering the payment of damages in favor of private
respondents.

Failure to give such notice amounts to torts, as held in similar case in

“disconnecting respondent Ongsip’s gas service without prior notice constitutes breach
of contract amounting to an independent tort. The prematurity of the action is
indicative of an intent to cause additional mental and moral suffering to private
respondent.

This is a clear violation of Article 21 of the Civil Code which provides that ‘any
person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to
morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for damages.’