G.R. NO.

L-39019 January 22, 1988

MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY and PEDRO YAMBAO, petitioners-appellants,

vs.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and ISAAC CHAVEZ, SR., ISAAC O. CHAVEZ, JR., ROSENDO O. CHAVEZ, and
JUAN O. CHAVEZ, respondents-appellees.

CASE DIGEST

FACTS: At or about the end of March 1965, Pedro Yambao, a bill collector of MERALCO, went to the residence of the respondents and
presented two overdue bills to Juana Chavez, who informed Yambao that the said bills would be paid at the MERALCO main office. On
April 2, 1965, Isaac Chavez went to the MERALCO main office, but only paid for one of the two overdue bills. Past 2:30 pm in the afternoon
of April 21, 1965, MERALCO caused the discontinuation of the electric service in the respondents’ residence. The next day, Rosendo
Chavez went to the main office and paid for the other overdue bill as of April 2, and also paid for the subsequent bill already due. The power
line was reconnected at about 7:00 pm of the same day.

In an action for recovery of damages for embarrassment, humiliation, wounded feelings and hurt pride, caused to the private respondents, by
reason of the disconnection of their electrical service by the petitioners, the then Court of First Instance of Manila ordered the petitioners
jointly and severally to pay the private respondents the sum of Php 10,000.00 as moral damages, Php 2,000.00 as exemplary damages, and
Php 1,000.00 as attorney’s fees.

On appeal, the petitioners contended that their failure to give a notice of disconnection might have been a breach of duty or of contract, but by
itself does not constitute bad faith or fraud, especially that the respondents were delinquent. Hence, according to the petitioners, no moral
damages may be recovered from them under the ‘clean hands’ doctrine.

ISSUE: WON moral damages are recoverable by reason of the failure of giving a notice of disconnection by the petitioners

HELD: Yes. It was held that MERALCO’s right to disconnect the electric service of a delinquent customer is absolute, subject only to the
requirement that MERALCO should give a written notice of disconnection 48 hours in advance, and that such disconnection shall never be
made after 2:00 pm of any working day. Thus, as held in the case of Manila Gas Corporation v. Court of Appeals, failure to give such prior
notice amounts to a tort, and the delinquency of a customer cannot be utilized to defeat or null the claim of damages. At most, such
circumstance can be considered as a mitigating factor in ascertaining the amount of damages.