G.R. No. L-9043; March 31, 1915
ANIANO MAGNO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. SERVANDO CASTRO, ET AL., defendants-appellants. MELCHOR FLOR, ET AL., intervenors-appellees.

FACTS:
The plaintiffs and intervenors are owners of agricultural lands in Batac, Ilocos Norte, irrigated by the waters of the Surangi Creek. The creek flows through the land of defendant Servando Castro. At the foot of Mount Cabaroan, within Castro’s land, there exists a natural depression that collects water, serving as a reservoir for irrigation during the dry season. The plaintiffs and their predecessors have used the creek’s waters and maintained this reservoir for irrigation for many decades, with evidence of an agreement for its maintenance dating back to 1788.

In 1910, defendant Castro began to fill in the depression/reservoir and dig a new, straight canal to alter a tortuous, semicircular section of the creek on his property. The plaintiffs alleged these acts would deprive them of water in the dry season, and that the new straight canal would cause a stronger current damaging their downstream irrigation dams and allow debris to silt their fields. They sought a perpetual injunction to stop the work and restore the original conditions.

Castro defended his actions as necessary to prevent flood damage to his own land from the creek’s old course and asserted his right as landowner to alter features on his property.

ISSUE:
Whether the defendant, as the owner of the land through which a public creek flows, can lawfully alter the creek’s course and fill a natural water reservoir on his property, when such alterations would injure the long-established prescriptive water rights of lower estate owners.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment granting a perpetual injunction against the defendant.

The Court held that while the defendant owns the land, the Surangi Creek is a public watercourse. The plaintiffs and intervenors, as owners of lower and adjacent estates, have acquired by prescription an easement to use its waters. They have used the waters of the creek and the reservoir for irrigation uninterruptedly for more than twenty years, thereby acquiring a perpetual right under Article 409 of the Civil Code (and the applicable Law of Waters of 1886).

As the holder of a servient estate, the defendant is governed by Article 545 of the Civil Code. He may make improvements or change the watercourse at his own expense, but only if he provides an equally suitable alternative and causes no injury to the holders of the water easement. The defendant’s actionsfilling the reservoir and straightening the creekwould directly injure the plaintiffs by depriving them of dry-season water storage and by creating a canal that could damage their irrigation structures and deposit harmful sediments on their fields. Since the alterations were injurious, the defendant had no right to proceed with them.

The Court upheld the injunction ordering Castro to desist from the operations and to leave things in their former condition. However, the claim for monetary damages was denied for lack of proof.