G.R. No. 116617 - METRO MANILA TRANSIT CORPORATION (MMTC), PEDRO A. MUSA, CONRADO TOLENTINO, FELICIANA CELEBRADO AND THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, SPS. RODOLFO V. ROSALES AND LILY ROSALES.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering defendant Metro Manila Transit Corporation primarily and defendant Pedro Musa subsidiarily liable to plaintiffs-spouses Rodolfo V. Rosales and Lily R. Rosales as follows: 1. Actual damages in the amount of P150,000.00; 2. Moral damages in the amount of P500,000.00; 3. Exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00; 4. Attorneys fees in the amount of P50,000.00; and 5. Costs of suit. [9] Both parties appealed to the Court of Appeals. On August 5, 1994, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court with the following modification: WHEREFORE, except for the modification deleting the award of P150,000.00 as actual damages and awarding in lieu thereof the amount of P30,000.00 as death indemnity, the decision appealed from is, in all other aspects, hereby AFFIRMED. [10] The spouses Rosales filed a motion for reconsideration, which the appellate court, in a resolution, dated September 12, 1996, partly granted by increasing the indemnity for the death of Liza Rosalie from P30,000.00 to P50,000.00. Hence, these appeals. In G.R. No. 116617, MMTC and Musa assail the decision of the Court of Appeals on the following grounds: PUBLIC RESPONDENT COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE COURT A QUOS DECISION PARTICULARLY IN NOT HOLDING THAT PETITIONER-APPELLANT MMTC EXERCISED THE DILIGENCE OF A GOOD FATHER OF A FAMILY IN THE SELECTION AND SUPERVISION OF ITS DRIVERS. THIS BEING THE CASE, APPELLANT MMTC IS ENTITLED TO BE ABSOLVED FROM ANY LIABILITY OR AT LEAST TO A REDUCTION OF THE RECOVERABLE DAMAGES. THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT COURT OF APPEALS, JUST LIKE THE COURT A QUO, OVERLOOKED THE FACT THAT PETITIONER MMTC, A GOVERNMENT-OWNED CORPORATION, COMMITTED NO FRAUD, MALICE, BAD FAITH, NOR WANTON, FRAUDULENT, OPPRESSIVE AND MALEVOLENT ACTUATIONS AGAINST HEREIN RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES. THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE COURT A QUOS DECISION TO HOLD PETITIONER-APPELLANT MMTC PRIMARILY LIABLE TO PRIVATE RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES IN THE AMOUNT OF P500,000 AS MORAL DAMAGES, P100,000 AS EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AND P30,000 BY WAY OF DEATH INDEMNITY. THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE COURT A QUOS DECISION IN RENDERING JUDGMENT FOR ATTORNEYS FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF P50,000.00 IN FAVOR OF PRIVATE RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES. On the other hand, in G.R. No. 126395, the spouses Rosales contend: The Court of Appeals erred in: First, considering that death indemnity which this Honorable Court set at P50,000.00 is akin to actual damages; Second, not increasing the amount of damages awarded; Third, refusing to hold all the defendants, now private respondents, solidarily liable. MMTC and Musa do not specifically question the findings of the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City that Liza Rosalie was hit by MMTC Bus No. 27. Nonetheless, their petition contains discussions which cast doubts on this point. [11] Not only can they not do