Case Digest (G.R. No. 37986)
Facts:
The case involves Eufemia Mercado as the Plaintiff and Appellant against the Municipal President of Macabebe, Pampanga, and the Secretary of Commerce and Communications, who are the Defendants and Appellees. The events leading to the appeal date back to a disagreement over the ownership of the creek known as Batasan-Limasan, also referred to as Pinac Bungalun, which traverses part of the Hacienda of Eufemia Mercado. The creek originated from excavations done by her predecessor, Romulo Mercado, who constructed two dikes to convert the creek into a fish pond. The central contention arises from whether this creek is a natural or artificial body of water; the Respondents argue it's a natural navigable creek and belonging to the public domain, while Eufemia maintains it was artificially created on her property. The lower court found that the creek is public property and ruled against Eufemia, leading her to appeal the decision.During the investigation, evidence indicated that the c
Case Digest (G.R. No. 37986)
Facts:
- Background of the Case
- Eufemia Mercado, the appellant and owner by donation, appealed from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga which had dismissed her appeal against an order of the Secretary of Commerce and Communications.
- The order directed Romulo Mercado, her predecessor in interest, to remove two dikes constructed at both ends of a creek known as Batasan-Limasan or Pinac Bungalun.
- Description and History of the Creek
- The creek traverses part of a hacienda described in Certificate of Title No. 329, originally owned by Romulo Mercado and later transferred to Eufemia Mercado by formal donation.
- Testimonies and documentary evidence showed that:
- Originally, when the hacienda belonged to Mariano Mercado (the appellant’s grandfather), the water body was a recess or arm (Bungalun) of the Nasi River.
- To aid in the transportation of firewood and other products, Mariano Mercado connected two bodies of water (Bungalun and a small creek called Batasan-Limasan) via excavations, forming a canal that later became known as the Batasan-Limasan or Pinac Bungalun creek.
- The creek appeared on the plan of the land and was not contested by any of the defendants or the Insular Government at the time of registration proceedings.
- Development and Use of the Creek
- Over time, the creek served as a water route:
- It was used by residents of the hacienda and surrounding barrios for fishing and transportation by bancas.
- Its navigability was attested by its measuring – over two meters deep at its mouth and about one and a half meters deep at shallower parts.
- In 1928, Romulo Mercado converted the creek into a fish pond by closing its two openings to the Nasi River and Limasan creek.
- Evidence Presented and Contentious Points
- Appellant’s Evidence:
- Witnesses (including Romulo Mercado, Maximo de la Pena, and Andres Limin) testified that the creek was rendered navigable only after excavations carried out in two distinct periods—one during the Spanish regime (or before the revolution) and again after the revolution.
- Established that subsequent to its opening, the creek was regularly used by both residents of the hacienda and the nearby communities.
- Appellees’ Evidence:
- Witnesses (Castor Quiambao, Maximino Guintu, Lorenzo Magat) asserted that the creek existed from time immemorial as a natural watercourse.
- They presented municipal resolutions (e.g., Resolution No. 6 of the municipal council of Macabebe, Pampanga) intended to evidence public usage, though such evidence was held insufficient.
- The parties disagreed on whether the creek was natural or artificial:
- The appellant contended that it was an artificial creation resulting from excavations.
- The appellees maintained that it was a natural, navigable waterway and part of the public domain.
- Legal Provisions and Factual Determinations
- The lower court, when deciding the case, invoked relevant provisions from the Civil Code:
- Article 339: Enumerates property devoted to public use (such as canals, rivers, and similar public infrastructures).
- Article 407: Lists types of waters considered public property (including waters flowing from private lands once they exit into public channels).
- Article 408: Defines the limits of private ownership of waters within estates.
- Consideration of prescription:
- Even if appellant's predecessors had acquired rights through their excavation, their exclusive right was lost due to long-term public use (from at least 1906 until the creek was closed in 1928).
Issues:
- The Primary Legal Issue
- Whether the Batasan-Limasan (or Pinac Bungalun) creek qualifies as a private property acquired by the appellant (through her predecessor's excavations and subsequent acts) or as a property of the public domain.
- Specific Points of Contention
- The nature of the creek:
- Was it a natural watercourse that existed from time immemorial, or
- An artificial canal crafted by excavations on a private hacienda?
- Whether the modifications (excavations and closing of openings) performed by Romulo Mercado could confer exclusive rights over the waterway.
- The impact of public usage and prescription on the ownership rights over the water course.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)