REPUBLIC VS. CA

Alluvium must be the exclusive work of nature. It has 3 requirements: 1) that the deposit be gradual and imperceptible; 2) through the current of the river; and 3) the land where the accretion takes place is adjacent to the river bank. Deposits made by human intervention are excluded.

FACTS:

The respondents (Tancinco’s) were registered owners of a parcel of land in Bulacan, bordering on the Maycauayan and Bocaue Rivers. They filed an application for the registration of three lots adjacent to their fishpond, but because of the recommendation of the Commissioner, they only pushed for the registration of two. The RTC and CA granted the petition despite the opposition of the Bureau of Lands.

The respondents based their claim on accretions to their fishponds. They presented a lone witness (their overseer). The Bureau of Lands argue that the lands in dispute are not accretions. They assert that what actually happened was that the respondents simply transferred their dikes simply further down the river bed of the Meycauayan River. Thus, if there was any accretion to speak of, it was man-made.

Respondents counter that the their evidence shows that accretion happened without human intervention and that the transfer of the dikes occurred only after.

ISSUE:

Whether accretion took place

RULING: No

Alluvion must be the exclusive work of nature. There is not evidence that the addition to said property was made gradually through the effects of the currents of the two rivers. The lands in question total almost 4 hectares of land, which are highly doubtful to have been caused by accretion. The lone witness testified that she observed an increase in the area in 1939, but the lots in question were not included in the survey of their adjacent property conducted in 1940. They were also not included in the Cadastral Survey of the entire Municipality of Maycauayan between the years 1958-1960. If the overseer was indeed telling the truth, the accretion was sudden, not gradual. When the respondents transferred their dikes towards the river beds, the dikes were meant for reclamation purposes and not to protect their property from the destructive force of the waters of the river. The lots in question were portions of the bed of the Meycauayan River and are therefore classified as public property.

Registration denied, decisions appealed are reversed. Note: The lands sought were not even dry land. The entire area was under one to two meters of water.