OWNERSHIP; EFFECT OF CHANGES OF COURSE OF NAVIGABLE RIVER. — Where a navigable river shifted its course during a flood into lots belonging to a private individual, the bed thus newly covered by its waters became property of public ownership. But when the next flood transferred the river bed farther south into plaintiffs’ lands, he ipso facto recovered the bed he had first lost, even as the new bed on their property accrued to the public domain.

Review of a Court of Appeals’ decision calling for interpretation or application of articles 366 and 372 of the Civil Code, which are quoted in the margin. 1

Way back in 1928, the Pampanga River running East to West, separated the land of Felipe Buencamino, Jr. from the lots of Maria Bolandos and others (herein described as plaintiffs). These lots in Cabiao, Nueva Ecija, were registered under the Torrens System, except that of plaintiff Juan Magbag. In 1954, when the complaint was filed in this case in Nueva Ecija, the Pampanga River was still flowing East to West but no longer in its 1928 bed. Its waters were then running about 387 meters farther to the south.

It seems that Buencamino’s agents claiming that his land extended south up to the (new) bed of the Pampanga River, took possession of the portion (north of the River) of the lots of plaintiffs, asserting ownership through accretion (Art. 366, Civil Code). Wherefore, the present action. As Buencamino subsequently sold his property to Salvador Crespo, the latter was substituted as sole defendant.

After hearing the parties, the court of first instance found for defendant. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding there had been no accretion, but a change or changes in the course of the Pampanga River affected during the years 1943 to 1945. Said the Appellate Court:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . Ya queda indicado que, seg