G.R. No. L-17652. June 30, 1962
Facts
P<>. Petitioners are owners of a registered parcel of land. The northeastern boundary of the land is the Cagayan River. Thereafter, a gradual accretion on the northeastern side took place by the action of the current of the Cagayan River. With that, an alluvial deposit of 19,964 square meters had been added to the registered land.
Petitioner instituted an action to quiet title to the said portion formed by accretion alleging that they and their predecessors-in-interest, were formerly in peaceful and continuous possession thereof, until September, 1948, when respondents entered upon the land under claim of ownership. On the contrary, respondents claim ownership in themselves, asserting that they have been in continuous, open, and undisturbed possession of said portion, since 1933 to the present.
p<>> The trial court ruled in favor of the petitioners while the CA reversed the ruling of the former. The CA provides that an accretion to registered land, while declared by specific provision of the Civil Code to belong to the owner of the land as a natural accession thereof, does not ipso jure become entitled to the protection of the rule of imprescriptibility of title established by the Land Registration Act. Such protection does not extend beyond the area given and described in the certificate of title.
Issue
Whether the accretion becomes automatically registered land just because the lot which receives it is covered by a Torrens title thereby making the alluvial property imprescriptible.
Held
No. Where alluvial increment is not registered, it may be acquired by third person through prescription. This is because ownership of a piece of land is one thing, and registration under the Torrens system of that ownership is quite another. While the owner of the registered property which received the alluvial increment is considered as the owner thereto under the Civil Code, such alluvial increment can be acquired by third persons through prescription if such was not brought or registered under the Torrens System.
In this case, petitioners never sought registration of said alluvial property. The increment, therefore, never became registered property, and hence is not entitled or subject to the protection of imprescriptibility enjoyed by registered property under the Torrens system. Consequently, it was subject to acquisition through prescription by third persons.
In other words, the case is telling us that accretion does not automatically become registered land just because the lot which receives such accretion is covered by a Torrens Title.