Agustin vs IAC [G.R. Nos. L-66075-76] Case Digest

 

Agustin vs IAC

G.R. Nos. L-66075-76

 

Facts:

In 1950, all lands west of the river were included in the Solana Cadastre. Among these occupying lands covered by the Solana Cadastre were plaintiffs-private respondents, namely, Pablo Binayug,  and Maria Melad, who owns Lot 3351.

Through the years, the Cagayan River eroded lands of the Tuguegarao Cadastre on its eastern bank among which was defendant-petitioner Eulogio Agustin's Lot 8457, depositing the alluvium as accretion on the land possessed by Pablo Binayug on the western bank.

However, in 1968, after a big flood, the Cagayan River changed its course, returned to its 1919 bed, and, in the process, cut across the lands of Maria Melad, Timoteo Melad, and the spouses Pablo Binayug and Geronima Ubina whose lands were transferred on the eastern, or Tuguegarao, side of the river.

The private respondents and their tenants were planting corn on their lots located on the eastern side of the Cagayan River, the petitioners, accompanied by the mayor and some policemen of Tuguegarao, claimed the same lands as their own and drove away the private respondents from the premises.

On April 21, 1970, private respondents Maria Melad and Timoteo Melad filed a complaint to recover Lot No. 3351 with an area of 5 hectares and its 6.6-hectare accretion. Private respondent Pablo Binayug filed a separate complaintto recover his lots and their accretions.

Trial court rendered a decision, restoring the ownership in favor of Maria Melad and Timoteo Melad who are the only interested heirs of Macario Melad; [and Pablo Binayug in another case]. IAC affirmed the judgment of trial court in toto.

 

Issue:

The Court of Appeals erred in declaring that the land in question had become part of private respondents' estate as a result of accretion

 

Held:

No.

 

Ratio:

The finding of the Court of Appeals that there had been accretions to the lots of the private respondents who did not lose the ownership of such accretions even after they were separated from the principal lots by the sudden change of course of the river, is a finding of fact which is conclusive on this Court. That finding is supported by Art. 457 of the New Civil Code which provides:

Art. 457. To the owners of lands adjoining the banks of rivers belong the accretion which they gradually receive from the effects of the current of the waters.