You are on page 1of 1

Palanca vs.

Commonwealth (1940)

Doctrine:

Issuance of a Torrens title does not confer title navigable streams (which are fluvial highways)
within registered property, nor is it conclusive on their non-existence, unless the boundaries of such
streams had been expressly delimited in the registration plan.

Facts:

On July 17, 1919 Carlos Palanca obtained a judgment from the Court of First Instance of Bulacan
to record four parcels of land adjacent to each other and separated by certain water ways called estuaries
under a Torrens title.

However, the Government through the Attorney General, filed a petition to reopen the case to
prove the existence of streams and navigable rivers within the field, to exclude it from enrollment of the
judgment.

The court denied the petition arguing that this would not affect the property rights of the Insular
Government or its public use.

Later, the Government of the Philippines filed the present action against Carlos Palanca claiming
that he is illegally occupying portions of the Viray River and Estero Sapang Sedaria, which are navigable
waters, and asked to be forced to open them, and to leave them in their original state.

LC Ruling:

Dismissed the case.

CA Ruling:

CA ruled in favor of the government on the accounts that the said waterways are navigable river
and estuary for common use, it serve as communication between two rivers, which flow into the Bay of
Manila, and streams in them are for public domain and use, useful for commerce, navigation and fishing.

Issue:

Whether or not the existence of a Torrens title confers title over navigable stream situated within
the registered property.

Held:

No. CA’s decision was affirmed

SC Ruling:

Bed of navigable streams are public property, and ownership thereof is not acquirable by adverse
possession.

Navigable waters cannot be subject to a judicial decision. River and navigable estuary, which is useful for
commerce, navigation and fishing have the character of public domain.

Torrens title issued in favor of Carlos Palanca establishes the nonexistence of the river and estuary in
question as navigable. In that decision, although it was said that the land was crossed by certain routes of
water called estuaries, there is no statement that these streams were not navigable.

You might also like