EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-6600. July 30, 1954. ]
HEIRS OF JUAN BONSATO and FELIPE BONSATO, Petitioners, v. COURT OF APPEALS and JOSEFA UTEA, ET AL., Respondents.
Benedicto C. Balderrama for petitioners. .
Inocencio Rosete for Respondents.
SYLLABUS
1. WILLS AND DONATIONS "MORTIS CAUSA" ; NO ONE MY BOTH DONATE AND RETAIN. — Despite the widespread use of the term "donations mortis causa," it is well-established at present that the Civil Code of 1989, in its article 620, broke away from the Roman Law tradition, and followed the French doctrine that no one may both donate and retain, by merging the erstwhile donations mortis causa with the testamentary dispositions, thus suppressing said donations as an independent legal concept. The term "donations mortis causa" as now commonly employed is merely a convenient name to designate those dispositions of property that are void when made in the form of donations.
2. ID.; ID.; REQUISITES OF A DISPOSITION "MORTIS CAUSA." — A disposition post mortem should reveal the following characteristics; (1) the transferor retains the ownership (full or naked) and control the property while alive; (2) the transfer is revocable, before his death, by the transferor at will, ad nutum; and (3) the transfer should be void if the transfer should be void if the transferor should survive the transferee.
3. ID.; DONATIONS "INTER VIVOS." — If the donor conveys the ownership and only reserves for himself during his lifetime the owner’s share of the fruits of procedure, and the deed expressly declares the act to be "irrevocable", it s not a donation mortis causa, but a conveyance inter vivos.
4. DONATIONS "MORTIS CAUSA" ; CASES THEREON. — In the cases held by the Supreme Court to be transfers mortis causa and declared invalid for not having been executed with the formalities of testaments, the circumstances clearly indicated the transferor’s intention to defer the passing of title until after his death. (Cariño v. Abaya, 70 Phil., 182; Bautista v. Sabiniano, 49 Off. Gaz. (No. 2), p. 549; David v. Sison, 42 Off Gaz., p. 3155.)
5. DONATIONS "INTER VIVOS" ; REQUISITES . — The solemnities required for a donation inter vivos are those prescribed by article 633 of the Civil Code of 1989 (reproduced in article 749, new Civil Code).
2. ID.; ID.; REQUISITES OF A DISPOSITION "MORTIS CAUSA." — A disposition post mortem should reveal the following characteristics; (1) the transferor retains the ownership (full or naked) and control the property while alive; (2) the transfer is revocable, before his death, by the transferor at will, ad nutum; and (3) the transfer should be void if the transfer should be void if the transferor should survive the transferee.
3. ID.; DONATIONS "INTER VIVOS." — If the donor conveys the ownership and only reserves for himself during his lifetime the owner’s share of the fruits of procedure, and the deed expressly declares the act to be "irrevocable", it s not a donation mortis causa, but a conveyance inter vivos.
4. DONATIONS "MORTIS CAUSA" ; CASES THEREON. — In the cases held by the Supreme Court to be transfers mortis causa and declared invalid for not having been executed with the formalities of testaments, the circumstances clearly indicated the transferor’s intention to defer the passing of title until after his death. (Cariño v. Abaya, 70 Phil., 182; Bautista v. Sabiniano, 49 Off. Gaz. (No. 2), p. 549; David v. Sison, 42 Off Gaz., p. 3155.)
5. DONATIONS "INTER VIVOS" ; REQUISITES . — The solemnities required for a donation inter vivos are those prescribed by article 633 of the Civil Code of 1989 (reproduced in article 749, new Civil Code).
D E C I S I O N
REYES, J.B.L., J.:
This is a petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals holding two deeds of donation executed on the first day of December, 1939 by the late Domingo Bonsato in favor of his brother Juan Bonsato and of his nephew Felipe Bonsato, to be void for being donations mortis causa accomplished without the formalities required by law for testamentary dispositions.
The case was initiated in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan (Case No. 8892) on June 7, 1945, by respondents Josefa Utea and other heirs of Domingo Bonsato and his wife Andrea Nacario, both deceased. Their complaint (for annulment and damages) charged that on the first day of December, 1949, Domingo Bonsato, then already a widower, had been induced and deceived into signing two notarial deeds of donations (Exhibits 1 and 2) in favor of his brother Juan Bonsato and of his nephew Felipe Bonsato, respectively, transferring to them several parcels of land covered by Tax Declaration Nos. 5652, 12049, and 12052, situated in the municipalities of Mabini and Burgos, Province of Pangasinan, both donations having been duly accepted in the same act and documents. Plaintiffs likewise charged that the donations were mortis causa and void for lack of the requisite formalities. The defendants, Juan Bonsato and Felipe Bonsato, answered averring that the donations made in their favor were voluntarily executed in consideration of past services rendered by them to the late Domingo Bonsato; that the same were executed freely without the use of force and violence, misrepresentation or intimidation; and prayed for the dismissal of the case and for damages in the sum of P2,000.
After trial, the Court of First Instance rendered its decision on November 13, 1949, finding that the deeds of donation were executed by the donor while the latter was of sound mind, without pressure or intimidation; that the deeds were of donation inter vivos without any condition making their validity or efficacy dependent upon the death of the donor; but as the properties donated were presumptively conjugal, having been acquired during the coverture of Domingo Bonsato and his wife Andrea Nacario, the donations were only valid as to an undivided one-half share in the three parcels of land described therein.
Thereupon the plaintiffs duly appealed to the Court of Appeals, assigning as primary error the holding of the court below that the donations are inter vivos; appellants contending that they were mortis causa donations, and invalid because they had not been executed with the formalities required for testamentary disposition.
A division of five of the Court of Appeals took the case under consideration, and on January 12, 1953, the majority rendered judgment holding the aforesaid donations to be null and void, because they were donations mortis causa and were executed without the testamentary formalities prescribed by law, and ordered the defendants-appellees Bonsato to surrender the possession of the properties in litigation to the plaintiffs-appellants. Two Justices dissented, claiming that the said donations should be considered as donations inter vivos and voted for the affirmance of the decision of the Court of First Instance. The donees then sought a review by this Court.
The sole issue submitted to this Court, therefore, is the juridical nature of the donations in question. Both deeds (Exhs. 1 and 2) are couched in identical terms, with the exception of the names of the donees and the number and description of the properties donated. The principal provisions are the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"ESCRITURA DE DONATION"
"Yo, Domingo Bonsato, viudo de Andrea Nacario, mayor de edad, vecino y residente del municipio de Agno, Pangasinan, I.F., por la presente declaro lo siguiente:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Que mi sobrino Felipe Bonsato, casado, tambien mayor de edad, vecino de Agno, Pangasinan, I.F., en consideracion de su large servicio a Domingo Bonsato, por la presente hago y otorgo una donacion perfecta a irrevocable consumada a favor del citado Felipe Bonsato de dos parcelas de terreno palayero como se describe mas abajo.
(Description omitted)
"Que durante su menor de edad de mi citado sobrino Felipe Bonsato hasta en estos dias, siempre me ha apreciado y estimado come uno de mis hijos y siempre ha cumplido todas mis ordenes, y por esta razon bajo su pobriza sea movido mi sentimiento para dar una recompensa de sus trabajos y aprecios a mi favor.
"Que en este de 1939 el donante Domingo Bonsato ha entregado a Felipe Bonsato dichos terrenos donados y arriba citados pero de los productos mientras vive el donante tomara la parte que corresponde como dueño y la parte como inquilino tomara Felipe Bonsato.
"Que en vista de la vejez del donante, el donatario Felipe Bonsato tomara posesion inmediatamente de dichos terrenos a su favor.
"Que despues de la muerte del donante entrara en vigor dicha donacion y el donatario Felipe Bonsato tendra todos los derechos de dichos terrenos en concepto de dueño absoluto de la propiedad libre de toda responsibilidad y gravamen y pueda ejercitar su derecho que crea conveniente.
"EN TESTIMONIO DE TODO LO CUAL, signo la presente en Agno, Pangasinan, I. F., hoy dia 1.
The case was initiated in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan (Case No. 8892) on June 7, 1945, by respondents Josefa Utea and other heirs of Domingo Bonsato and his wife Andrea Nacario, both deceased. Their complaint (for annulment and damages) charged that on the first day of December, 1949, Domingo Bonsato, then already a widower, had been induced and deceived into signing two notarial deeds of donations (Exhibits 1 and 2) in favor of his brother Juan Bonsato and of his nephew Felipe Bonsato, respectively, transferring to them several parcels of land covered by Tax Declaration Nos. 5652, 12049, and 12052, situated in the municipalities of Mabini and Burgos, Province of Pangasinan, both donations having been duly accepted in the same act and documents. Plaintiffs likewise charged that the donations were mortis causa and void for lack of the requisite formalities. The defendants, Juan Bonsato and Felipe Bonsato, answered averring that the donations made in their favor were voluntarily executed in consideration of past services rendered by them to the late Domingo Bonsato; that the same were executed freely without the use of force and violence, misrepresentation or intimidation; and prayed for the dismissal of the case and for damages in the sum of P2,000.
After trial, the Court of First Instance rendered its decision on November 13, 1949, finding that the deeds of donation were executed by the donor while the latter was of sound mind, without pressure or intimidation; that the deeds were of donation inter vivos without any condition making their validity or efficacy dependent upon the death of the donor; but as the properties donated were presumptively conjugal, having been acquired during the coverture of Domingo Bonsato and his wife Andrea Nacario, the donations were only valid as to an undivided one-half share in the three parcels of land described therein.
Thereupon the plaintiffs duly appealed to the Court of Appeals, assigning as primary error the holding of the court below that the donations are inter vivos; appellants contending that they were mortis causa donations, and invalid because they had not been executed with the formalities required for testamentary disposition.
A division of five of the Court of Appeals took the case under consideration, and on January 12, 1953, the majority rendered judgment holding the aforesaid donations to be null and void, because they were donations mortis causa and were executed without the testamentary formalities prescribed by law, and ordered the defendants-appellees Bonsato to surrender the possession of the properties in litigation to the plaintiffs-appellants. Two Justices dissented, claiming that the said donations should be considered as donations inter vivos and voted for the affirmance of the decision of the Court of First Instance. The donees then sought a review by this Court.
The sole issue submitted to this Court, therefore, is the juridical nature of the donations in question. Both deeds (Exhs. 1 and 2) are couched in identical terms, with the exception of the names of the donees and the number and description of the properties donated. The principal provisions are the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"ESCRITURA DE DONATION"
"Yo, Domingo Bonsato, viudo de Andrea Nacario, mayor de edad, vecino y residente del municipio de Agno, Pangasinan, I.F., por la presente declaro lo siguiente:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Que mi sobrino Felipe Bonsato, casado, tambien mayor de edad, vecino de Agno, Pangasinan, I.F., en consideracion de su large servicio a Domingo Bonsato, por la presente hago y otorgo una donacion perfecta a irrevocable consumada a favor del citado Felipe Bonsato de dos parcelas de terreno palayero como se describe mas abajo.
(Description omitted)
"Que durante su menor de edad de mi citado sobrino Felipe Bonsato hasta en estos dias, siempre me ha apreciado y estimado come uno de mis hijos y siempre ha cumplido todas mis ordenes, y por esta razon bajo su pobriza sea movido mi sentimiento para dar una recompensa de sus trabajos y aprecios a mi favor.
"Que en este de 1939 el donante Domingo Bonsato ha entregado a Felipe Bonsato dichos terrenos donados y arriba citados pero de los productos mientras vive el donante tomara la parte que corresponde como dueño y la parte como inquilino tomara Felipe Bonsato.
"Que en vista de la vejez del donante, el donatario Felipe Bonsato tomara posesion inmediatamente de dichos terrenos a su favor.
"Que despues de la muerte del donante entrara en vigor dicha donacion y el donatario Felipe Bonsato tendra todos los derechos de dichos terrenos en concepto de dueño absoluto de la propiedad libre de toda responsibilidad y gravamen y pueda ejercitar su derecho que crea conveniente.
"EN TESTIMONIO DE TODO LO CUAL, signo la presente en Agno, Pangasinan, I. F., hoy dia 1.
