GR 112483; (October, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 112483 October 8, 1999
ELOY IMPERIAL, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF LEGASPI CITY, CESAR VILLALON, JR., TERESA VILLALON, ANTONIO VILLALON, AUGUSTO VILLALON, ROBERTO VILLALON, RICARDO VILLALON and ESTHER VILLALON, respondents.
FACTS
Leoncio Imperial owned a 32,837-square meter parcel of land. On July 7, 1951, he executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the property in favor of his acknowledged natural son, Eloy Imperial, for a nominal sum of P1.00, which both parties later admitted was a donation in reality. Leoncio later sued to annul the deed, but the case was settled via a compromise agreement in 1961, wherein Leoncio recognized the validity of Eloy’s rights. Leoncio died in 1962, survived by Eloy and his adopted son, Victor Imperial. Victor died in 1977 without issue, and his heirs (the Villalons) subsequently filed a complaint in 1986, seeking to annul the donation on grounds of fraud and inofficiousness, arguing it impaired Victor’s legitime.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the donation made by Leoncio Imperial to his acknowledged natural son, Eloy, is inofficious for impairing the legitime of his adopted son, Victor, and whether the action to reduce the donation had prescribed.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the lower courts, holding the donation to be inofficious. The legal logic centers on the protection of compulsory heirs’ legitimes under the Civil Code. A donation is inofficious if it exceeds the disposable free portion of the donor’s estate, thereby encroaching on the legitime of compulsory heirs. At the time of Leoncio’s death, the donated land was his only proven property. The Court applied Article 895 of the Civil Code, which provides that the legitime of an acknowledged natural child is one-half of the legitime of a legitimate (or adopted) child. The trial court correctly computed the legitimes: half of the estate constituted the free portion, which Leoncio could validly donate. The other half, reserved for legitimes, was apportioned with Victor (the adopted child) receiving a share twice that of Eloy (the acknowledged natural child). Consequently, the donation was reduced to the extent it impaired Victor’s rightful share.
Regarding prescription, the Court rejected Eloy’s defense. An action for reduction of an inofficious donation prescribes in ten years from the donor’s death, pursuant to Article 771 of the Civil Code. Leoncio died in 1962, and the original complaint was filed in 1986, well beyond the prescriptive period. However, the Court held that the defense of prescription was deemed waived as it was not raised as an issue during the pre-trial conference. Under the Rules of Court, defenses not pleaded or included in the pre-trial order are generally waived, barring exceptions not applicable here. Thus, the action was not barred. The Court ordered Eloy to convey to Victor’s heirs the portion of the land equivalent to Victor’s impaired legitime.