G.R. No. 132681; December 3, 2001
Ricky Q. Quilala, petitioner, vs. Gliceria Alcantara, Leonora Alcantara, Ines Reyes and Jose Reyes, respondents.

FACTS

Catalina Quilala executed a notarized Deed of Donation Inter Vivos over a parcel of land in favor of Violeta Quilala on February 20, 1981. The first page contained the donation proper, signed by Catalina as donor, Violeta as donee, and two instrumental witnesses. The second page contained the notarial acknowledgment, which only stated that Catalina personally appeared and acknowledged the deed as her free act. The signatures of Catalina and one witness appeared on the left margin, and Violeta and the other witness on the right margin of this second page. The donation was registered, and title was issued to Violeta.
After the deaths of Catalina and later Violeta, respondents, claiming to be Catalina’s only surviving relatives, executed an extrajudicial settlement over the property and filed an action to declare the donation null and void. The trial court ruled the donation void, finding no acceptance by Violeta in a public instrument and casting doubt on Violeta’s status as a legitimate child. The Court of Appeals affirmed but modified the dismissal, stating the complaint lacked cause of action without prejudice to probate proceedings concerning Catalina’s will.

ISSUE

Whether the Deed of Donation Inter Vivos executed by Catalina Quilala in favor of Violeta Quilala is valid.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition and declared the donation valid. The legal logic is anchored on Article 749 of the Civil Code, which requires donations of immovable property to be made in a public instrument, specifying the property and any charges. The Court clarified that the law does not require the acceptance to be contained in a separate public instrument. Acceptance may be made in the same public instrument of donation or in a separate one, but it must be made during the lifetime of the donor.
Here, the Deed of Donation itself is a public instrument, duly notarized. Crucially, the donee, Violeta Quilala, signed the deed on its first page, which explicitly constituted her acceptance made in that same public instrument. The fact that the notarial acknowledgment on the second page only mentioned Catalina’s appearance did not invalidate the acceptance already clearly expressed and documented within the integrated public document. The signatures on the margins were merely confirmatory. Therefore, all legal formalities for a valid donation inter vivos were complied with. The Court declined to rule on familial relationships, noting such issues pertain to settlement or probate proceedings where the donation’s possible inofficiousness or subjection to collation could be properly ventilated.