Title
Agustin vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
Case
G.R. No. 66075-76
Decision Date
Jul 5, 1990
Cagayan River's gradual accretion shifted lands, leading to a dispute over ownership. SC upheld private respondents' claim under Article 457, ruling accretion gradual and imperceptible.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 66075-76)

Petitioners and Respondents

Petitioners claimed title to certain parcels now occupied by private respondents. Private respondents hold original certificates or homestead patents covering lands and accretions deposited by the river’s gradual eastward shift from 1919 to 1968.

Key Dates

• 1919: Tuguegarao Cadastre surveyed lands east of the river.
• 1925: Title No. 5472 issued to Eulogio Agustin for eastern bank land.
• 1947: Pablo Binayug began possession of Solana‐side lots.
• 1950: Solana Cadastre covered west‐bank parcels.
• 1956: Original Title No. P-5026 issued to Macario Melad (predecessor of Maria and Timoteo Melad).
• 1959: Binayug’s Homestead Application No. W-79055 approved.
• 1968: Major flood returned Cagayan River to its 1919 bed, isolating accreted lands on opposite bank.
• April 1969: Petitioners, backed by local authorities, expelled respondents from the isolated lands.
• 1970–1975: Separate civil actions filed and decided in favor of respondents.
• 1983: Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed trial court decision.
• July 5, 1990: Supreme Court rendered final decision under the 1987 Constitution.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution (property provisions)
• New Civil Code (1916), Arts. 457 (accretion), 459 and 463 (avulsion)

Factual Background

Originally, Tuguegarao Cadastre (1919) covered lands east of the river; Solana Cadastre (1950) covered west‐bank lands. Riparian owners on the west bank (Binayug and Melad) improved and cultivated their parcels. As the river shifted eastward over 49 years, silt deposits gradually and imperceptibly enlarged respondents’ parcels. The 1968 typhoon‐induced flood abruptly reverted the river to its old course, transferring accreted increments to the opposite bank.

Trial Court Proceedings

Respondents sued to recover their principal lots and accretions. In Civil Case No. 343-T (Melads) and No. 344-T (Binayug and Ubina), the trial court ordered petitioners and their agents to vacate the lands and restore possession to respondents, without pronouncement on damages.

Intermediate Appellate Court Ruling

On November 29, 1983, the Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed the trial court in toto, holding that accretions belonged to riparian respondents and remained theirs despite the river’s sudden change of course.

Issues on Review

  1. Whether the added lands constitute accretion in favor of respondents.
  2. Whether such accretion could deprive petitioners of ownership.
  3. Whether respondents lost ownership of the accretions after the river’s abrupt course change.

Accretion Analysis

Under Civil Code Art. 457, accretion vests in riparian owners when deposits are gradual, result from current, and occur adjacent to the bank. Unrebutted evidence showed annual, imperceptible eastward shifts depositing alluvium on respondents’ lands from 1919 to 1968. Measurement only revealed incremental gains long after they occurred.

Avulsion Analysis

Civil Code Arts. 459 and 463 protect owne




...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.