Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 23 views

    New Regent Resources v. Tanjuatco

    Uploaded by

    Maria Michelle Moraca
    This case discusses the doctrine of accession and the right of accretion. The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner, New Regent Resources, Inc., failed to prove it had a valid claim to the subject properties based on accretion. Accretion requires gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil or sediment by river waters onto land adjacent to the riverbank. The petitioner did not provide evidence this occurred. The titles were originally issued to the Republic of the Philippines, and were later transferred validly. The respondent Tanjuatco was considered an innocent purchaser in good faith who relied on the correctness of the original certificates of title issued by the Republic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    New Regent Resources v. Tanjuatco

    Uploaded by

    Maria Michelle Moraca
    23 views3 pages
    This case discusses the doctrine of accession and the right of accretion. The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner, New Regent Resources, Inc., failed to prove it had a valid claim to the subject properties based on accretion. Accretion requires gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil or sediment by river waters onto land adjacent to the riverbank. The petitioner did not provide evidence this occurred. The titles were originally issued to the Republic of the Philippines, and were later transferred validly. The respondent Tanjuatco was considered an innocent purchaser in good faith who relied on the correctness of the original certificates of title issued by the Republic.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses the doctrine of accession and the right of accretion. The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner, New Regent Resources, Inc., failed to prove it had a valid claim to the subject properties based on accretion. Accretion requires gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil or sediment by river waters onto land adjacent to the riverbank. The petitioner did not provide evidence this occurred. The titles were originally issued to the Republic of the Philippines, and were later transferred validly. The respondent Tanjuatco was considered an innocent purchaser in good faith who relied on the correctness of the original certificates of title issued by the Republic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    23 views3 pages

    New Regent Resources v. Tanjuatco

    Uploaded by

    Maria Michelle Moraca
    This case discusses the doctrine of accession and the right of accretion. The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner, New Regent Resources, Inc., failed to prove it had a valid claim to the subject properties based on accretion. Accretion requires gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil or sediment by river waters onto land adjacent to the riverbank. The petitioner did not provide evidence this occurred. The titles were originally issued to the Republic of the Philippines, and were later transferred validly. The respondent Tanjuatco was considered an innocent purchaser in good faith who relied on the correctness of the original certificates of title issued by the Republic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    New Regent Resources v. Tanjuatco, Jr.

    and Cuevas, 585 SCRA 329


    (2009)

    DOCTRINE:
    Accession
    But it must be stressed that accretion as a mode of acquiring property
    under Article 457 of the NCC requires the concurrence of the following
    requisites:
    1. That the deposition of soil or sediment be gradual and
    imperceptible;
    2. That it be the result of the action of the waters of the river; and
    3. That the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the bank
    of rivers

    Thus, it is not enough to be a riparian owner in order to enjoy the


    benefits of accretion. One who claims the right of accretion must show
    by preponderant evidence that he has met all the conditions provided by
    law. Petitioner has notably failed in this regard as it did not offer any
    evidence to prove that it has satisfied the foregoing requisites.

    FACTS:

    Petitioner New Regent Sources, Inc. (NRSI) filed a Complaint for


    Rescission/Declaration of Nullity of Contract, Reconveyance and
    Damages against respondent Tanjuatco and the Register of Deeds of
    Calamba. NRSI alleged that in 1994, it authorized Cuevas, its
    Chairman and President, to apply on its behalf, for the acquisition of two
    parcels of land by virtue of its right of accretion. Cuevas purportedly
    applied for the lots in his name by paying P82,400.38 to the Bureau of
    Lands. On January 2, 1995, Cuevas and his wife executed a Voting
    Trust Agreement over their shares of stock in the corporation. Then,
    pending approval of the application with the Bureau of Lands, Cuevas
    assigned his right to Tanjuatco for the sum of P85,000. On March 12,
    1996, the Director of Lands released an Order, which approved the
    transfer of rights from Cuevas to Tanjuatco. Transfer Certificates of
    Titles were then issued in the name of Tanjuatco. NRSI anchors its claim
    over the lands subjects of this case on the right of accretion. It submitted
    in evidence, titles to four parcels of land, which allegedly adjoin the lots
    in the name of Tanjuatco.
    • RTC dismissed NSRI’s Complaint/ denied Motion for
    Reconsideration
    • NSRI filed petition for review on Certiorari

    ISSUE:

    1) W/N the complaint for rescission/declaration of nullity of contract,


    reconveyance and damages against Tanjuanco may prosper
    2) W/n NRSI has claim over the subject property base on the right of
    accretion
    3) W/N Cuevas is an innocent purchaser in good faith

    RULING:

    1) No.

    An action for reconveyance is one that seeks to transfer property,


    wrongfully registered by another, to its rightful and legal owner.22 In an
    action for reconveyance, the certificate of title is respected as
    incontrovertible. What is sought instead is the transfer of the property,
    specifically the title thereof, which has been wrongfully or erroneously
    registered in another person’s name, to its rightful and legal owner, or to
    one with a better right.

    To warrant a reconveyance of the land, the following requisites


    must concur:
    (1) the action must be brought in the name of a person claiming
    ownership or dominical right over the land registered in the name of the
    defendant;
    (2) the registration of the land in the name of the defendant was
    procured through fraud or other illegal means;
    (3) the property has not yet passed to an innocent purchaser for
    value; and
    (4) the action is filed after the certificate of title had already become final
    and incontrovertible but within four years from the discovery of the
    fraud, or not later than 10 years in the case of an implied trust.

    Petitioner failed to show the presence of these requisites.

    2) No.

    Accretion as a mode of acquiring property under Article 45731 of


    the Civil Code requires the concurrence of the following requisites:
    (1) that the deposition of soil or sediment be gradual and imperceptible;
    (2) that it be the result of the action of the waters of the river; and
    (3) that the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of
    rivers.

    It is not enough to be a riparian owner in order to enjoy the


    benefits of accretion. One who claims the right of accretion must show
    by preponderant evidence that he has met all the conditions provided by
    law. Petitioner has notably failed in this regard as it did not offer any
    evidence to prove that it has satisfied the foregoing requisites.

    Further, it is undisputed that Tanjuatco derived his title to the lands


    from Original Certificate of Title (OCT) registered in the name of the
    Republic of the Philippines. Said parcels of land formed part of the Dried
    San Juan River Bed, which under Article 502 (1) of the Civil Code rightly
    pertains to the public dominion. The Certification issued by the forester
    confirms that said lands were verified to be within the Alienable and
    Disposable lands certified and declared as such on September 28, 1981.
    Clearly, the Republic is the entity which had every right to transfer
    ownership thereof to respondent.

    3) Yes.

    Tanjuatco’s titles were derived from Original Certificates of Title in the


    name of no less than the Republic of the Philippines. Hence, we cannot
    validly and fairly rule that in relying upon said title, Tanjuatco acted in
    bad faith. A person dealing with registered land may safely rely upon the
    correctness of the certificate of title issued therefor and the law will in no
    way oblige him to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of
    the property. This applies even more particularly when the seller
    happens to be the Republic, against which, no improper motive can be
    ascribed. The law, no doubt, considers Tanjuatco an innocent purchaser
    for value. An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the property
    of another, without notice that some other person has a right or interest
    in such property and pays the full price for the same, at the time of such
    purchase or before he has notice of the claims or interest of some other
    person in the property.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy