Department of Education v. Del Rosario
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondents filed a complaint for Recovery of Possession against petitioner DECS, alleging ownership of a 1,181 square meter parcel of land in Bulacan, registered under their names. They claimed DECS's Kaypombo Primary School Annex (KPPS) occupied a portion of their land through their tolerance. Procedural History: DECS countered that the occupation was with the consent of respondents' father, Isaias Del Rosario, who allegedly donated a portion of the land (Donated Site) for school purposes in 1959. DECS claimed ownership of the 650 square meter Donated Site. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the complaint, finding that DECS proved the due execution and loss of the deed of donation through secondary evidence. The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC, holding that DECS failed to prove the existence and due execution of the deed of donation and the municipal council's resolution accepting it, and that DECS did not conduct a diligent search for the lost documents. DECS's motion for reconsideration was denied. The Petition: DECS filed a petition for review, arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that it failed to prove the due execution or existence of the deed of donation and the resolution accepting it, as well as the loss of these documents.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in holding that petitioner failed to prove the due execution or existence of the deed of donation and the resolution of the municipal council accepting the donation, as well as the loss of the documents as the cause of their unavailability. Whether the donation of real property was validly made and proven.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The donation is declared void for failure to comply with the formal requisites of Article 749 of the Civil Code, specifically the lack of proof of a public document evidencing the donation and its acceptance, and the failure to establish a diligent search for the lost original documents.
Ratio Decidendi
On the failure to prove the due execution or existence of the deed of donation and the resolution accepting it, as well as the loss of the documents: The Court held that DECS failed to satisfy the requisites for the admission of secondary evidence. While DECS presented witnesses who testified about the alleged donation and the preparation of a deed, the original deed and the municipal council resolution accepting the donation were not presented. The Court found the search for the lost documents inadequate, particularly noting that the notary public, Atty. Eli Natividad, failed to account for other copies of the deed or his notarial register, which is mandated by law to be kept and forwarded to the Clerk of Court. The Court emphasized that a diligent search must be made in the place where the document is most likely to be found, and DECS did not present evidence of searching in the office of the Clerk of Court or the National Archives. The testimony of the witnesses, without the primary documents or a satisfactory explanation for their absence, was insufficient to prove the existence and due execution of the donation and acceptance. On the validity of the donation: The Court reiterated that under Article 749 of the Civil Code, the donation of immovable property must be made in a public document to be valid. The acceptance must also be made in the same deed or a separate public document. In this case, DECS failed to present the deed of donation or the resolution of acceptance as public documents. The Court found no proof that the donee communicated its acceptance to the donor in writing, aside from the construction of the school during the donor's lifetime without objection, which was insufficient to establish a valid acceptance in a public instrument. The Court concluded that DECS did not establish by a preponderance of evidence that a valid donation of real property occurred, as the required formalities were not met and the evidence presented was insufficient to overcome the respondents' registered title.
Main Doctrine
The failure to present the original deed of donation for real property, coupled with an inadequate showing of diligent search for its loss and the non-production of the notary public's notarial register or a satisfactory explanation for its absence, renders secondary evidence of the donation inadmissible, thus invalidating the donation.