GR 233304; (July, 2020) (Digest)
G.R. No. 233304 , July 28, 2020
Republic of the Philippines, Petitioner, vs. Ernesto Q. Tongson, Sr., Norma Limsiaco, Ernesto L. Tongson, Jr., Ray L. Tongson, Cristobal L. Tongson, Normalyn L. Tongson, and Kerwin L. Tongson, Respondents.
FACTS
Respondents, the Tongson family, filed a land registration case for a 10,142-square-meter parcel of land in Himamaylan City, Negros Occidental. They claimed the land was formed by accretion (alluvium) from the Aguisan River, adjacent to their two titled properties (Lot 9 and Lot 10). In support, they submitted Certifications from the City Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The CENRO certification stated the land was an accretion (alluvium) and that confirmation of title belonged to the courts. No opposition was filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) or any interested party. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted the application. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision, citing Article 457 of the Civil Code that accretion belongs to the riparian owner. The OSG appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the CENRO certification alone is insufficient proof of accretion and that the land’s size makes gradual accretion improbable.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the grant of the application for land registration based on the respondents’ claim that the subject land was formed by accretion.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition and SET ASIDE the CA decision. The respondents’ application for land registration was DENIED for failure to adequately substantiate their claim of accretion.
The Court held that while administrative agency certifications are accorded respect, they are not conclusive proof. For a claim of accretion under Article 457 of the Civil Code to succeed, the riparian owner must prove: (1) the deposit was gradual and imperceptible; (2) it resulted from the current of the water; and (3) the land where accretion took place is adjacent to the riverbank. Here, the respondents relied primarily on the CENRO and DENR certifications. The testimony of Ernesto Q. Tongson, Sr. was insufficient, as he could not competently establish the fact of gradual accretion and only knew the land’s size from the CENRO survey. The certifying officer or a competent agency representative should have testified to establish the factual basis for the conclusion that the land was alluvium. The Court also found that the size of the accretion (10,142 sqm), while substantial, did not by itself rule out gradual accretion when considered alongside the aggregate size of the respondents’ adjoining properties. However, the failure to present competent evidence on the requisites of accretion was fatal to the application.