DOCTRINE OF ACCRETION

INTRODUCTION

The Doctrine of Accretion is an important branch of property law that has been borrowed from Roman law and deals with the problem of ownership of land that is slowly built up by becoming gradually annexed to the main piece of land. This doctrine mainly concerns property that is gradually accumulated by rivers or seas over time, gradually encroaching on the neighbour’s territory. Thus, although the Doctrine of Accretion may seem to be quite simple, it is actually an important legal principle that is used often in legal cases involving land borders and properties. Generally, the said doctrine has not remained stagnant but has gone through constant changes to suit the legal requirements of states and settings at a particular period and environment. Thus, one of the main purposes is to give legal regulation to the fact that the amount of land is increasing due to natural processes, and set up rules for properly attributing the ownership of formed land. This evolution has been influenced by the desire, recognized by property law, to achieve fairness and justice in light of shifts on the ground as imposed by the gradual and hidden chameleon. 

The effect of the Doctrine of Accretion is quite operational for those who own properties, lawyers, and lawmakers, especially in areas where the sea, river, and other forces of nature are frequently influencing the territorial borders. For those working in such environments, maintaining an appreciation regarding the doctrine proves necessary as it applies to addressing the formation of property rights and any conflicts involving the process. This doctrine does not only have an impact on the current scenario of the property owners but also impacts the legal and even the environmental situation. 

This article is pertinent for understanding the analysis on Doctrine of Accretion since it outlines its history, legal regulation, and examples in the development of the law. It will discuss case laws that have defined the application of the doctrine of součástía, the problems related to differentiating between accretion and avulsion, and impacts of the usage of this doctrine in other environments. Therefore, through providing an overall review of the Doctrine of Accretion, this paper will serve to improve awareness regarding the topic and its relevance within property law.

OVERVIEW OF THIS DOCTRINE

Accretion is another legal principle ingrained in property law that determines the ownership over land that grows slowly over time by natural factors including the advance of river or sea. This doctrine is applied when land which through natural factors is brought into an existing property, some controversy over ownership arises as to the newly formed land. Accretion is not purely a legal question of the acquisition of land but is more of an issue identifying the rational distribution of natural processes and property rights. 

Accretion is known as a slow process and is distinguished from other forms of changes to the site, which are addressed under other legal rules such as avulsion. It is far from simple to say that this piece of land was once part of that particular owner, and over time, this or that portion has accreted away from the other, because accretion itself can take rather long periods, and thus the natural transition of property boundaries is seldom free from legal complication. Different jurisdictions take different stances in the Applying of the Doctrine of Accretion as it follows the common law and it has modifications in statutes according to different environment and geographical area. 

The concept relies on the law for accretion, which is believed to be due to the fact that owners of contiguous lands to the water may naturally gain by accretion, given that it is gradual and incremental. However, this principle also creates hard legal issues especially when the new land interferes with other properties/land or other public assets. Legal questions that oftentimes are given to the courts to solve include whether the accretion was gradual or not, and therefore whether the obtained land is to be regulated in the same manner as the original piece of land or not. 

In other words, the legal area of accretion is simply centered on the definition and understanding of property rights with reference to natural process. It opposes one’s conventional perception of property as something that is stable and predictable, as it involves certain unpredictable and naturally evolving aspects for which one has to study law and the environment. Therefore, the Doctrine of Accretion continues to remain a core branch of the property law impacting decisions which define holding of land and its use within the areas affected by natural forces.

CASE LAW ANALYSIS

• Arunachalam Vs. Murugantha [AIR 1953 SC 495]

In this regard, the Supreme Court opined that the nature of property can be decided basically depending on the intention, in this case, of the father. However, if the father was able, by deed, to express whether the property was to be considered as belonging to the son separately or to the family in common, then it would fall into the category stated. However, if the father never expressed this intent, then it would be presumed by the court by considering the literal evidence within the deed and the circumstances of the environment.

• V. D. Dhanwatey Vs. CIT [AIR 1968 SC 682]

The Supreme Court had stated that according to the Hindu law, when a Karta or a coparcener purchases any property with the prospect of the joint family assets, the property becomes joint family property. That is, to qualify for being considered as separate property, a particular asset has to be purchased through the owner’s own effort without involving the joint family property in any way. Therefore, if any person asserts that the property is his self-acquired separate property there is need to demonstrate that the property was earned or acquired without the aid of the joint family.

• Arshnoor Singh Vs. Harpal Kaur [AIRONLINE 2019 SC 382]

Here, the Supreme Court affirmed that under the Mitakshara law, if the male ancestor acquires the property from the ancestors of his father’s side up to the male ancestor three generations higher, then the male descendants, on the same line up to three generations lower, are also entitled to equal status to share the property as coparceners.

ANALYZING LEGAL PRINCIPLES

The Doctrine of Accretion is worked under principles of equity and natural justice for the most part to allow owners of land or property to benefit from any expansion of the said property that occurs naturally while not defeating the objectives of property rights. This doctrine postulates that when the land closeness to a water body expands naturally, for instance, the sedimentation brought about by a river or sea, the new land formed should belong to the owner of the neighbouring property. In so doing, this principle is somewhat an elaboration of the previous point because the land traditionally and gradually blends with the original property, making it possible for the adjacent landowner to rightfully occupy the new area.

A key principle of the Doctrine of Accretion is jus accrescendi, a Latin phrase that loosely translates to the right to add to one’s asset by natural means. It forms the basis of this doctrine because it supports the transfer of ownership of the newly consolidated parcel to the owner of the neighbour’s property. It includes the reasoning behind why property rights ought to rise in proportion to the size of the land or its natural growth through specific default natural processes, rewarding the owner for the steady but gradual accumulation of land.

COMPARISON BETWEEN U.S. AND INDIA

United States

• • The Doctrine of accretion is clear and is often relied upon in the United States more so in River, lake and coastlines. A. The Supreme Court of the United States has to hold that land which has accumulated slowly without one’s knowledge belongs to the owner of the bordering property. 
  • Computer implementation of the doctrine poses no challenges since the general principles of the law allows the court to establish that gradual and geometric advancements of the acreage enlarge the area of the joining property. This is seen to portray a clear and most plausible strategy concerning property rights for natural land increase. 

• The primary framework of the legal system in the U.S is largely grounded on the process of build-up and accumulation of lands. While considering the accumulation over time feature, the courts seldom get involved in elaborate distinctions between environment or geography, compared to the general rule of gradual accretion that contributes to the adjacent property. 

India

• The aforementioned Doctrine however does not exist in India explicitly in the same way, it is applied with a little more divergent viewpoint. Indian courts have stressed the difference between accretion and avulsion where by accretion refers to change in borderline which may be gradual and not noticeable whereas avulsion refers to change in status of land which is clearly perceptible and noticeable. 
• The application of the doctrine in India takes into account certain factors such as the effects of the changes of ecological conditions like the movement of river courses or coastal accretion. This process gives a better understanding of various geographical and environmental conditions that are present in the case of India. 
• Indian legal principles apply consideration to some conditions surrounding the formation of the land, which factors may be other than environmental. This leads to a more localized and therefore realistic implementation of the doctrine because the authors understand that different natural changes in the territories of India are possible because of the specificity of conditions and characteristics of the territory.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES

Real-world Application

• The Doctrine of Accretion influences the property owners especially under conditions that compel physiological change on the physical boundaries of an individual’s property such as river banks, sea shores etc. 
• Owners of properties stand to gain an increased size of their piece of land and possibly its value through a gradual process of accretion. This may result in positive change of property ownership. 
• Disputes often may occur between two owners of neighbouring plots of land when the newly created piece of land becomes an issue of a controversy. That is why, in order to resolve such conflict, the courts are to assess whether the process of the land formation was gradual and hardly noticeable. 

Challenges

• It is tough to differentiate between accretion and avulsion mass. Accretion is gradual and is characterized by slight and unnoticed change of the land while avulsion is rapid and change is seen and noticeable. To define the nature of the formation of the earth’s surface, it may take some time mainly due to the actions of natural phenomena such as floods or storms that lead to sharp changes. 
• Other concerns which include environmental and ecological issues cannot be overlooked. This is an important element of geography because changes in the outlines of land due to natural processes can impact on ecosystems of a specific area. Therefore, there is a requirement of legal provisions, which will help in coping with the effects of the identified environmental impacts as well as the sustainable usage of the Doctrine of Accretion especially in vulnerable regions.

CONCLUSION

The Doctrine of Accretion is one of the substantial principles concerning acquisition of property and application of law of property, especially emergent land. This doctrine has definite roots in equity and natural justice to enable the owner of land which joins another’s land to get advantage of a new piece of land created by the growth of nature. The approach to the treatment of the case law and the general principles of law demonstrates the applicability of this doctrine in the provision of land boundaries improvement particularly given the fact that natural forces are always in the process of changing the boundaries of these land features. With explicit protectors like governments attempting to always shift and change territories with some form of physical force, the Doctrine of Accretion will remain an issue in property law in the future. As for the courts, it will be a never-ending quest to identify the ratios of the property owners’ rights to the outcomes of the formation of most of the lands and the implications therefore of the ecological issues involved. Future changes in the legislation of the sphere might demand the creation of new and more complicated patterns which could face new challenges associated with changes in the natural environment. This improvement will be very useful in ensuring that the Doctrine of Accretion receives fair changes in respect to the growing environmental challenges.