LYDIA SUMIPAT v.

BRIGIDO BANGA
[ GR No. 155810, Aug 13, 2004 ]

Title to immovable property does not pass from the donor to the donee by virtue of a deed of donation
until and unless it has been accepted in a public instrument and the donor duly notified thereof.

An individual who makes any transfer by gift shall make a return and file the same within 30 days after
the date the gift is made with the Revenue District Officer, Collection Agent or duly authorized Treasurer
of the municipality in which the donor was domiciled at the time of the transfer.

FACTS:

The spouses Placida Tabo-tabo and Lauro Sumipat acquired three parcels of land. The couple was
childless. Lauro Sumipat, however, sired five illegitimate children. They are the petitioners. Lauro
executed a document denominated “Deed of Absolute Transfer and/or Quit-Claim over Real Properties”
in favor of the petitioners. On the document, it appears that the signature of his wife, Placida which
indicates that she gave her marital consent.
Moreover, it was alleged that Lauro executed it when he was already very sick and bedridden
that upon petitioner Lydia’s request, their neighbor Benjamin Rivera lifted the body of Lauro whereupon
Lydia guided his hand in affixing his signature on the document. Lydia left but later returned on the same
day and requested Lauro’s unlettered wife, Placida to sign on the said document. After Lauro’s death, his
legal wife, Placida and petitioners (the illegitimate children) jointly administered the properties, 50% of
the produce went to his wife. As wife’s share in the produce of the properties dwindled, she filed a
complaint for declaration of nullity of titles, contracts, partition, recovery of ownership now the subject
of the present appeal (the titles to the property where transferred to the heirs, without her knowing.)
RTC ruled in favor of the petitioners. CA ruled in favor of Placida. Placida was unlettered.
Petitioners failed to prove that the terms were fully explained to her. CA annulled the deed insofar as
Placida’s conjugal share.

ISSUE:
Whether the questioned deed by its terms or under the surrounding circumstances has validly transferred
title to the disputed properties to the petitioners?

RULING:
NO.

A perusal of the deed reveals that it is actually a gratuitous disposition of property a donation
although Lauro Sumipat imposed upon the petitioners the condition that he and his wife, Placida, shall be
entitled to one-half (1/2) of all the fruits or produce of the parcels of land for their subsistence and
support.
The deed covers three (3) parcels of land. Being a donation of immovable property, the
requirements for validity set forth in Article 749 of the Civil Code should have been followed, viz:

Art. 749. In order that the donation of the immovable may be valid, it must be made in a public
document, specifying therein the property donated and the value of the charges which the donee must
satisfy.
The acceptance may be made in the same deed of donation or in a separate public document, but it shall
not take effect unless it is done during the lifetime of the donor.

If the acceptance is made in a separate instrument, the donor shall be notified thereof in an authentic
form, and this step shall be noted in both instruments.

In this case, the donees' acceptance of the donation is not manifested either in the deed itself or
in a separate document. Hence, the deed as an instrument of donation is patently void.

Furthermore, SC noted there was an abence in filing of the necessary return, payment of donor's
taxes on the transfer, or exemption from payment thereof. Under the National Internal Revenue Code of
1977, the tax code in force at the time of the execution of the deed, an individual who makes any transfer
by gift shall make a return and file the same within 30 days after the date the gift is made with the Revenue
District Officer, Collection Agent or duly authorized Treasurer of the municipality in which the donor was
domiciled at the time of the transfer.

SC declared the the Deed of Absolute Transfer and/or Quitclaim dated January 5, 1983 NULL AND
VOID; and Ordered the CANCELLATION of Transfer Certificates of Title covering said properties.