Bonifacia Mateo, et al. v. Gervasio Lagua, et al.
G.R. No. L-26270, October 30, 1969
Cipriano Lagua and his wife Alejandra Dumlao, in a public instrument, donated
the two parcels of land to their son Alejandro Lagua, in consideration of the latter’s
marriage to Bonifacia Mateo. The couple took possession of the properties, but the
Certificates of Title remained in the donor’s name. Cipriano Lagua later executed a deed
of sale of the same two parcels of land in favor of his younger son, Gervasio. A TCT
were issued to Gervasio. Bonifacia Mateo and her daughter, Anatalia, sought the
annulment of the deed of sale in favor of Gervasio Lagua and for recovery of
possession of the properties which was granted by the court. The decision became
final, and Bonifacia Mateo, and her daughter, Anatalia Lagua, were installed in
possession of the land.
Gervasio Lagua and Cipriano Lagua, filed a complaint for annulment of the
donation of the two lots, insofar as one-half portion thereof was concerned claiming that
in donating the two lots, said plaintiff not only neglected leaving something for his own
support but also prejudiced the legitime of his forced heir, plaintiff Gervasio Lagua.
While the cases were pending, plaintiff Cipriano Lagua died. The Court of Appeals held
that the donation to Alejandro Lagua of the 2 lots prejudiced the legitime of Cipriano’s
other heir, Gervasio Lagua. The donation was thus declared inofficious, and
defendants-appellees were ordered to reconvey to plaintiff Gervasio Lagua a portion of
494.15 square meters to be taken from any convenient part of the lots.
ISSUE: Is the court of appeals ruling on the inofficiousness of the donation proper?
No. ART. 908 of the civil code provides that to determine the legitime, the value
of the property left at the death of the testator shall be considered, deducting all debts,
and charges, which shall not include those imposed in the will. To the net value of the
hereditary estate, shall be added the value of all donations by the testator that are
subject to collation, at the time he made them. In other words, before any conclusion
about the legal share due to a compulsory heir may be reached, it is necessary that
certain steps be taken first. The net estate of the decedent must be ascertained, by
deducting a payable obligations and charges from the value of the property owned by
the deceased at the time of his death; then, all donations subject to collation would be
added to it. With the partible estate thus determined, the legitimes of the compulsory
heir or heirs can be established; and only thereafter can it be ascertained whether or not
a donation had prejudiced the legitimes. Certainly, in order that a donation may be
reduced for being inofficious, there must be proof that the value of the donated property
exceeds that of the disposable free portion plus the donee’s share as legitime in the
properties of the donor. In the present case, it can hardly be said that, with the evidence
then before the court, it was in any position to rule on the inofficiousness of the donation involved here, and to order its reduction and reconveyance of the deducted portion to the respondents.
