G.R. No. 73465 September 7, 1989
LEONIDA CUREG, ET AL., petitioners, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Private respondents, heirs of Francisco and Domingo Gerardo, filed a complaint for quieting of title against petitioners, the heirs of Antonio Carniyan. They claimed ownership of a “motherland” allegedly possessed since time immemorial by the Gerardo family, which had accreted by about three hectares due to the northward movement of the Cagayan River. They further alleged that they had verbally sold this land, including the accretion, to co-respondent Domingo Apostol. Petitioners, in defense, asserted that the subject land in dispute was an accretion to their own titled property, Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093, and that they had been in possession and cultivation of it for many years. They denied the existence of the Gerardo “motherland.” The trial court ruled in favor of private respondents, declaring Domingo Apostol the absolute owner, a decision affirmed by the Intermediate Appellate Court.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the subject land, an accretion of approximately 5.5 hectares, belongs to the petitioners as an increment to their titled property or to the private respondents as successors to an alleged “motherland.”

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions. The legal logic centered on the application of Article 457 of the Civil Code and the burden of proof regarding the existence of the claimed “motherland.” The Court found that private respondents failed to substantiate the existence of their alleged “motherland.” Their evidence, primarily the testimony of an interested witness regarding pedigree to establish possession since 1894, was deemed insufficient. In contrast, petitioners demonstrated their possession of the accretion through tax declarations and a Bureau of Lands investigation report showing Antonio Carniyan’s occupation. Applying Article 457, the Court held that the accretion belonged to the owners of the land adjoining the riverbank—here, the petitioners, as their titled property was bounded by the Cagayan River. However, the Court clarified that while the accretion legally belongs to the petitioners, the approximately 5.5-hectare increment does not automatically become registered land merely because it adhered to a titled property. The accretion itself must be brought under the Torrens system through the appropriate registration proceedings. Consequently, the complaint for quieting of title was dismissed for failure of private respondents to prove their claimed ownership.