MERALCO V. WILCOM BUILDERS (CIVIL)

The Ridjo doctrine stated that the public utility has the imperative duty to make a reasonable and proper inspection of its apparatus and equipment to ensure that they do not malfunction. Its failure to discover the defect, if any, considering the length of time amounts to inexcusable negligence; its failure to make the necessary repairs and replace the defective electric meter installed within the consumer's premises limits the latter's liability.

The rationale behind this ruling is that public utilities should be put on notice as a deterrent, that if they completely disregard their duty of keeping their electric meters in serviceable condition, they run the risk of forfeiting, by reason of their negligence, amounts originally due from their customers. Certainly, we cannot sanction a situation wherein the defects in the electric meter are allowed to continue indefinitely until suddenly the public utilities concerned demand payment for the unrecorded electricity utilized when in the first place, they should have remedied the situation immediately.

If we turn a blind eye on Meralco's omission, it may encourage negligence on the part of public utilities to the detriment of the consuming public.

We sustain the CA's finding of negligence on the part of the petitioner and thus, negate its claimed entitlement to a differential billing.

When the meter is tampered with, the registered electric consumption is reduced. Consequently, in case of the removal of the tampered meter and the installation of a new one, the registered consumption necessarily increases. However, in the instant case, after the replacement of the alleged tampered meter, respondent's consumption remained the same.

Courts cannot and will not in any way blindly grant a public utility's claim for differential billing if there is no sufficient evidence to prove such entitlement.