Title
Republic vs. Asuncion
Case
G.R. No. 200772
Decision Date
Feb 17, 2021
Spouses Asuncion sought land registration, claiming accretion and inheritance. SC partially granted, reversing registration of some parcels due to insufficient proof of accretion and alienability.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200772)

Key Dates and Procedural Milestones

• December 29, 1976 – Original registration application filed (LRC No. 3681-M)
• November 14, 1988 – Notice of initial hearing published
• July 10, 2001 – Regional Trial Court (RTC) Decision favoring Asuncions
• February 26, 2002 – RTC denies Republic’s motion for reconsideration
• September 15, 2006 – Supreme Court grants Republic’s appeal sua sponte
• November 11, 2011 & February 23, 2012 – Court of Appeals (CA) affirms RTC
• February 17, 2021 – Supreme Court issues final ruling under 1987 Constitution

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution: Due process guarantee
• Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529) and Revised Rules of Court, Rule 132, Section 38 (formal offer of evidence; objections)
• Civil Code Article 457 (alluvial accretion)
• Spanish Law of Waters of 1866, Article 4 (littoral accretion)
• Public Land Act (Sections 58–61 on foreshore lands)

Factual Background

Felipe and Paciencia Asuncion held OCT No. 0-423 (later TCT No. RT-30648) for a 273,819 sqm riparian parcel along the Wawang Dapdap River. In 1976 Paciencia and her children applied for original registration of nine adjoining parcels—later reduced by compromise to five—claiming inheritance, accretion, and thirty-year adverse possession. The Republic opposed as public forest land; competing private claimants (Molina-Enriquez) alleged portions belonged to them.

Trial Court Proceedings

After protracted delays and a 1996 compromise with Molina-Enriquez, the trial court admitted the Asuncions’ evidence (photographs, original tracing cloth plans, surveyor testimony, overseer’s account) and declared the Republic to have waived its presentation when its subpoenaed witness failed to appear. On July 10, 2001, the RTC ordered registration of five parcels in favor of the Asuncions.

Due Process and Evidence Issues

The Republic argued denial of due process: hurried admission of Asuncions’ exhibits, inadequate time to object, refusal to reset hearing after its witness no-show, and denial of its reconsideration motion for alleged pro forma reasons. The SC applied Rule 132, Sec. 38 and jurisprudence on formal offers and objections, finding that although the RTC prematurely admitted exhibits, the Republic itself repeatedly sought and missed extensions, and ultimately failed to timely object or present evidence.

Doctrine on Accretion and Registrability

Under Civil Code Article 457, alluvial accretions—gradual deposits by river currents—vest in riparian owners and are privately acquisitive. Littoral accretions—deposits by sea action—constitute foreshore land, inalienable except by lease (Public Land Act; Waters Law 1866, Art. 4). Riparian owners need only prove accretion; alienability need not be separately established.

Substantive Merits: Accretion Proven

Testimony and maps demonstrated sequential formation of new land southwest of the mother parcel between 1933 and 1948, with shifting river mouth and shoreline. Witnesses described gradual sedimentation by the Wawang Dapdap River, subsequent stabilization, and fishpond development. A 1956 CFI decision between identical parties had earlier adjudicated these lands as accretions upon OCT 0-423, thus establishing res judicata on their nature.

Source of A

...continue reading

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