View full case

SIMPLICIO BINALAY v. GUILLERMO MANALO

FACTS:

The late Judge Juan Taccad owned a parcel of land in Tumauini, Isabela measuring about 20 hectares. Respondent Guillermo Manalo purchased 8.65 hectares of the land from Faustina Taccad, daughter of Judge Juan Taccad, in 1959. He later bought an additional 1.80 hectares from Gregorio Taguba, bringing his total acquisition to 10.45 hectares. However, a portion of the land bought from Faustina Taccad, which was underwater, was left unsurveyed and not included in Lot 307 during a survey conducted in 1969. There was also a strip of land formed by the Cagayan River, designated as Lot 821 and Lot 822, with Lot 821 adjacent to Lot 307. Petitioners claimed ownership of Lot 821 and a case for forcible entry was initially filed but dismissed. Respondent Manalo then filed a complaint for quieting of title, possession, and damages, asserting ownership of the two parcels of land bought from Faustina Taccad and Gregorio Taguba. The trial court rendered a decision which was not detailed. Petitioners appealed the decision, but the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that Lot 821 is connected to Lot 307 and that the disputed property is not an island. The trial court and the Court of Appeals held that the land in question is subject to gradual deposits of alluvion and does not require an express act of possession.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the ruling in Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Colegio de San Jose is applicable to the present case

  2. Whether Article 70 of the Law of Waters of 3 August 1866 is the applicable law in determining the character and ownership of the disputed property

  3. Whether respondent Manalo acquired private ownership of the bed of the eastern branch of the river.

  4. Whether there was evidence to prove that Lot 821 is an increment to Lot 307 and the bed of the eastern branch of the river.

  5. Whether Lot 821 is an accretion to the eastern bed of the Cagayan River.

  6. Whether respondent Manalo has prior possession over Lot 821.

  7. Whether petitioners have lawful and adverse possession of Lot 821.

RULING:

  1. The Court disagrees with the Court of Appeals that the ruling in Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Colegio de San Jose is applicable to the present case. The case involved Laguna de Bay, a lake, and the legal provisions governing the ownership and use of lakes and their beds and shores were applied. In the present case, the disputed property involves the eastern bed of the Cagayan River.

  2. The Court holds that Article 70 of the Law of Waters of 3 August 1866 is the applicable law in determining the character and ownership of the disputed property. The article defines the natural bed or channel of a creek or river as the ground covered by its waters during the highest floods. The highest floods in the eastern branch of the Cagayan River occur during the rainy months, causing the eastern bed to be covered with flowing river waters.

  3. Respondent Manalo did not acquire private ownership of the bed of the eastern branch of the river. The vendors could not validly sell land that constituted property of public dominion.

  4. There was no evidence to prove that Lot 821 is an increment to Lot 307 and the bed of the eastern branch of the river. The claimed accretion (Lot 821) lies on the bank of the river not adjacent to Lot 307 but directly opposite Lot 307 across the river.

  5. Lot 821 is not an accretion to the eastern bed of the Cagayan River.

  6. Respondent Manalo failed to prove prior possession over Lot 821.

  7. The Court refrains from determining the ownership and possession of Lot 821.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The natural bed or basin of a lake is defined as the ground covered by the lake's waters when at their highest ordinary depth. (Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Colegio de San Jose)

  • The natural bed or channel of a creek or river is the ground covered by its waters during the highest floods. (Article 70, Law of Waters of 3 August 1866)

  • Article 420 of the Civil Code states that rivers and their beds are property of public dominion.

  • Accretion as a mode of acquiring property under Article 457 of the Civil Code requires the concurrence of three requisites: gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil or sediment, result of the action of the waters of the river (or sea), and land adjacent to the banks of rivers (or the sea coast).

  • Alluvium process contemplated under Article 457 of the Civil Code refers to the slow and hardly perceptible accumulation of soil deposits.

  • In determining accretion, the size of the claimed accretion should be consistent with the slow and gradual accretion to the adjacent land.

  • The ownership and possession of accretion must be established by solid and convincing evidence.

  • In an action for quieting of title, the plaintiff must have equitable title to or interest in the real property subject of the action.

  • The ownership of a disputed property should be determined in an appropriate action.