Narag v. Rosario
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Eligio Narag applied for the registration of four parcels of land under Act No. 496. The Director of Lands objected, claiming the lands were part of the public domain. Juan del Rosario also objected to the registration of Lots Nos. 2 and 3, asserting ownership over the accreted portions. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Cagayan confirmed the title of petitioner Narag for one parcel (Exhibit A) and Lot No. 1 (Exhibit C), but denied registration for Lots Nos. 2 and 3 (Exhibit C), sustaining Juan del Rosario's objection. The Director of Lands' opposition was dismissed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the land registration court. The Petition: Petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court, questioning the denial of registration for Lots Nos. 2 and 3.
Issue(s)
Whether Lots Nos. 2 and 3, which are accretions to the land of Juan del Rosario, should be registered in the name of Eligio Narag. Whether the dividing line between the properties of Narag and del Rosario should be extended in a straight line or follow the natural course of the accretion.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, denying the registration of Lots Nos. 2 and 3 in the name of Eligio Narag and declaring them as belonging to Juan del Rosario, the riparian owner.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether Lots Nos. 2 and 3 should be registered in the name of Eligio Narag: The Court held that Lots Nos. 2 and 3, which were formed by accretion along the Cagayan River, belong to Juan del Rosario as the riparian owner. The findings established that Juan del Rosario purchased land from Elena Banguilan, and as the Cagayan River receded westward, the tillable portion of his land increased. This accretion was in possession and cultivation by del Rosario through his tenants. The Court found no error in the Court of Appeals' conclusion that these accreted lots were part of del Rosario's property. On the extension of the dividing line: The Court, relying on the pronouncement of the Court of Appeals which was based on Manresa's commentary, held that the dividing line between adjacent properties due to accretion must be extended in a straight line from the original point. This is to prevent prejudice to the adjacent owner. Extending the line in its natural course, which would favor Narag, was deemed unjust and contrary to the legislator's intent. Therefore, the dividing line was ordered to be extended in a straight line from the old point on the East towards the West, confirming that the accreted soil belonged to Juan del Rosario.
Main Doctrine
The extension of a dividing line between adjacent properties due to accretion must be in a straight line from the original point to avoid prejudicing the adjacent owner, and the accreted soil belongs to the riparian owner.