EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-26270. October 30, 1969.]

BONIFACIA MATEO, ET AL. , petitioner, vs . GERVASIO LAGUA, ET AL. ,

respondents.

Pedro P. Tuason for petitioners.

Isaiah Asuncion for respondents.

SYLLABUS

1. REMEDIAL LAW; APPEALS; NON-CONTENTIOUS ISSUES WITHOUT

BEARING ON APPEALED CASE NOT SUBJECT TO REVIEW; INSTANT CASE. —
Petitioners' rst two assigned errors are non-contentious issues that have no bearing in
the actual controversy in this case. All of them refer to the validity of the donation — a
matter which was de nitely settled and which, precisely, was declared by the Court of
Appeals to be "beyond the realm of judicial inquiry."
2. ID.; ACTIONS; CAUSE OF ACTION ACCRUING AFTER NEW CIVIL CODE
TOOK EFFECT GOVERNED BY SAME CODE. — The cause of action to enforce
Gervasio's legitime, having accrued only upon the death of his father on 12 November
1958, the dispute has to be governed by the pertinent provisions of the new Civil Code.
3. CIVIL LAW; PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS; DONATION PROPTER
NUPTIAS; REDUCTION THEREOF WHEN INOFFICIOUS. — A donation propter nuptias
properly may be reduced for being inofficious.
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; NO ONEROUS CONSIDERATION INVOLVED. — Donations
propter nuptias (by reason of marriage) are without onerous consideration, the
marriage being merely the occasion or motive for the donation, not causa. Being
liberalities, they remain subject to reduction for ino ciousness upon the donor's death,
if they should infringe the legitime of a forced heir.
5. ID.; SUCCESSION; DETERMINATION OF LEGITIMES; PROCEDURE. —
Before any conclusion about the legal share due to a compulsory heir may be reached,
it is necessary that certain steps be taken rst. The net estate of the decedent must be
ascertained, by deducting all 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.
6. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; REQUISITE BEFORE A DONATION MAY BE REDUCED FOR
BEING INOFFICIOUS. — In order that a donation may be reduced for being ino cious,
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.

DECISION
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 REYES, J.B.L., J : p

This is a petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals (In CA-G.R.
Nos. 30064-R and 30065-R), raising as only issue the correctness of the appellate
court's reduction of a donation propter nuptias, for being inofficious.

The established facts of this case are as follows:

Cipriano Lagua was the original registered owner of 3 parcels of land situated in
Asingan, Pangasinan, referred to as Lot No. 998, with an area of 11,080 sq.m., more or
less and covered by O.C.T. No. 362; Lot No. 6541, with an area of 808 sq.m., more or
less, covered by O.C.T. No. 6618; and Lot No. 5106, with an area of 3,303 sq. m.,
covered by O.C.T. No. 8137. Sometime in 1917, Lagua and his wife Alejandra Dumlao, in
a public instrument, donated Lots 998 and 6541 to their son Alejandro Lagua, in
consideration of the latter's marriage to Bonifacia Mateo. The marriage was celebrated
on 15 May 1917, and thereafter, the couple took possession of the properties, but the
Certificates of Title remained in the donor's name.
In 1923, the son, Alejandro, died. His widow, Bonifacia Mateo, and her infant
daughter lived with her father- in-law, Cipriano Lagua, who then undertook the farming
of the donated lots. It seems that at the start, Cipriano Lagua was giving to Bonifacia
the owner's share of the harvest from the land. In 1926, however, Cipria refused to
deliver the said share, thus prompting Bonifacia to resort to the Justice of the Peace
Court of Asingan, Pangasinan, from where she obtained a judgment awarding to her
possession of the two lots, plus damages.
On 31 July 1941, Cipriano Lagua executed a deed of sale of the same two
parcels of land in favor of his younger son, Gervasio. This sale notwithstanding,
Bonifacia Mateo was continuously given the owner's share of the harvest until 1956,
when it was altogether stopped. It was only then that Bonifacia Mateo learned of the
sale of the lots to her brother-in-law, who had the sale in his favor registered only on 22
September 1955. As a consequence, TCT Nos. 19152 and 19153 of the Register of
Deeds of Pangasinan were issued to Gervasio.
Bonifacia Mateo and her daughter, Anatalia, assisted by her husband, Luis
Alcantara, went to the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan (Civil Case No. T-339),
seeking annulment of the deed of sale in favor of Gervasio Lagua and for recovery of
possession of the properties. On 3 January 1957, judgment was rendered in the case -
". . . declaring the sale executed by Cipriano Lagua in favor of the other
defendants, Gervasio Lagua and Sotera Casimero, as null and void and non-
existent; ordering the Register of Deeds for the province of Pangasinan, to cancel
Transfer Certi cates of Title Nos. 19152 and 19153; condemning the defendants
to pay jointly and severally to the plaintiffs the sum of P200.00; ordering the
defendants Gervasio Lagua and Sotera Lagua to vacate and deliver the
possession over the two parcels of land to the plaintiffs, and to pay the costs of
this suit."

The decision became nal, and Bonifacia Mateo and her daughter, Anatalia Lagua, were
installed in possession of the land.
On 18 August 1957, the spouses Gervasio Lagua and Sotera Casimero
commenced in the Justice of the Peace Court of Asingan, Pangasinan, an action against
Bonifacia Mateo and her daughter for reimbursement of the improvements allegedly
made by them on Lots 998 an 6541, plus damages. Dismissed by the Justice of the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Peace Court for being barred by the judgment in Civil Case No. T-339, therein plaintiffs
appealed to the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan where the case was docketed as
Civil Case No. T-433. At about the same time, another case was led, this time by
Gervasio Lagua and Cipriano Lagua, for annulment of the donation of the two lots,
insofar as one-half portion thereof was concerned (Civil Case No. T-442). It was their
claim that in donating the two lots, which allegedly were all that plaintiff Cipriano Lagua
owned, said plaintiff not only neglected leaving something for his own support but also
prejudiced the legitime of his forced heir, plaintiff Gervasio Lagua.
Being intimately related, the two cases were heard jointly. On November 12,
1958, while the cases were pending nal resolution, plaintiff Cipriano Lagua died. On 23
December 1960, the court rendered a single decision dismissing Civil Case No. T-433
for lack of cause of action, plaintiffs spouses Gervasio Lagua and Sotera Casima
having been declared possessors in bad faith in Civil Case No. T-339 and, therefore, not
entitled to any reimbursement of the expenses and improvements put up by them on
the land. The other suit, Civil Case No. T-442, was, likewise, dismissed on the ground of
prescription, action to annul the donation having been brought only in 1958, or after the
lapse of 41 years. Defendants' counter-claims were similarly dismissed although they
were awarded attorneys' fees in the sum of P150.00.
Plaintiffs appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. Nos. 30064 and
30065-R). Said tribunal, on 18 March 1966, a rmed the ruling of the trial court in Case
No. T-433 denying plaintiffs' claim for reimbursement of the improvements said to have
been made on the land. In regard to the annulment case (C.F.I. No. T-442), however, the
Court of Appeals held that the donation to Alejandro Lagua of the 2 lots with a
combined area of 11,888 square meters exceeded by 494.75 square meters
(Alejandro's) legitime and the disposable portion Cipriano Lagua could have freely given
by will, and, the same extent prejudiced the legitime of Cipriano's other heir, Gervasio
Lagua. The donation was thus declared ino cious, and defendants-appellees were
ordered to reconvey to plaintiff Gervacio Lagua a portion of 494.75 square meters to
be taken from any convenient part of the lots. The award of attorneys' fees to the
defendants was also eliminated for lack of proper basis.
Bonifacia Mateo, et al., then resorted to this Court, assailing the decision of the
Court of Appeals insofar as it ordered them to reconvey a portion of the lots to herein
respondent Gervasio Lagua. It is petitioners' contention that (1) the validity of the
donation propter nuptias having been nally determined in Civil Case No. T- 339, any
question in derogation of said validity is already barred; (2) that the action to annul the
donation, led in 1958, or 41 years after its execution, is abated by prescription; (3) that
a donation propter nuptias is revocable only for any of the grounds enumerated in
Article 132 of the new Civil Code, and ino ciousness is not one of them; and (4) that in
determining the legitime of the Lagua brothers in the hereditary estate of Cipriano
Lagua, the Court of Appeals should have applied the provisions of the Civil Code of
1889, and not Article 888 of the new Civil Code.
Petitioners' rst two assigned errors, it may be stated, are non-contentious
issues that have no bearing in the actual controversy in this case. All of them refer to
the validity of the donation — a matter which was de nitively settled in Civil Case No. T-
339 and which, precisely, was declared by the Court of Appeals to be "beyond the realm
of judicial inquiry." In reality, the only question this case presents is whether or not the
Court of Appeals acted correctly in ordering the reduction of the donation for being
inofficious, and in ordering herein petitioners to reconvey to respondent Gervasio Lagua
an unidentified 494.75-square-meter portion of the donated lots.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 We are in accord with the Court of Appeals that Civil Case No. 442 is not one
exclusively for annulment revocation of the entire donation, but of merely that portion
thereof allegedly trenching on the legitime of respondent Gervasio Lagua; 1 that the
cause of action to enforce Gervacio's legitime, having accrued only upon the death of
his father on 12 November 1958, the dispute has to be governed by the pertinent
provisions of the new Civil Code; and that a donation propter nuptias property may be
reduced for being ino cious. Contrary to the views of appellants (petitioners),
donations propter nuptias (by reason of marriage) are without onerous consideration,
the marriage being merely the occasion or motive for the donation, not its causa. Being
liberalities, they remain subject to reduction for ino ciousness upon the donor's death,
if they should infringe the legitime of a forced heir. 2
It is to be noted, however, that in rendering the judgment under review, the Court
of Appeals acted on several unsupported assumptions: that the three (3) lots
mentioned in the decision (Nos. 998, 5106 and 6541) were the only properties
composing the net hereditary estate of the deceased Cipriano Lagua; that Alejandro
Lagua and Gervasio Lagua were his only legal heirs; that the deceased left no unpaid
debts, charges, taxes, etc., for which the estate would be answerable. 3 In the
computation of the heirs' legitime, the Court of Appeals also considered only the area,
not the value, of the properties.
The in rmity in the above course of action lies in the fact that in its Article 908
the new Civil Code specifically provides as follows:
"ART. 908. 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 rst. The net estate of
the decedent must be ascertained, by deducting all 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 ino cious, 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. 4 In the
present case, it can hardly be said that, with the evidence then before the court, it was in
any position to rule the ino ciousness of the donation involved here, and to order its
reduction and reconveyance of the deducted portion to the respondents.
FOR THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the decision of the Court of Appeals,
insofar as Civil Case No. 442 of the court a quo is concerned, is hereby set aside and
the trial court's order of dismissal sustained, without prejudice to the parties' litigating
the issue of ino ciousness in a proper proceeding, giving due notice to all sons
interested in the estate of the late Cipriano Lagua. Without costs.
Concepcion, C.J., Dizon, Makalintal, Zaldivar, Sanchez, Castro, Fernando,
Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., occur.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 Footnotes
1. See Complaint, Civil Case No. 442, page 50, Record a Appeal: 'That plaintiff Gervasio
Lagua is entitled for a protection of his rights over the one-half of each of said two
parcels of land which (are) supposed to be reserved for the legitimes of forced heirs, and
which plaintiff" (Cipriano) "could not donate . . ."

2. 21 Scaevola, Cod. Civ., 2d Ed., pages 328-329: 348-349; Vol. I, Reyes and Puno, An
Outline of Philippine Civil Law, 1965 ed., page 166.
3. There is no evidence on these facts.
4. Ramos vs. Cariño, L-17429 (October 31, 1962), 6 SCRA 482, 486.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com