Short answer. Yes, though not the property itself. Once you validly revoke a donation for ingratitude, Article 767 lets you demand from the donee the value of property alienated which he cannot recover from third persons, or the sum it was mortgaged for, valued as of the time of the donation.
What the law says
the donor shall have a right to demand from the donee the value of property alienated which he cannot recover from third persons, or the sum for which the same has been mortgaged
Civil Code, Article 767 — Donor's Claim For Value. Read the full provision →
You claim value, not the thing
When a donee has already sold or mortgaged the property before a revocation for ingratitude, the law does not let you chase the property into the hands of a third person who bought it. Instead it gives you a money claim against the donee. Article 767 says the donor may demand from the donee the value of property alienated which he cannot recover from third persons, or the sum for which the same has been mortgaged. So the donee who disposed of your gift and then behaved with ingratitude does not simply keep everything; he must answer to you for the value of what he put beyond your reach.
How the amount is measured
The article is precise about valuation. It provides that the value of said property shall be fixed as of the time of the donation — not its value on the day the donee sold it, and not its value today. This protects both sides from arguing about later market swings. If the donee mortgaged rather than sold the property, your claim is measured by the sum for which it was mortgaged. The point is to restore to you, in money, what the gift was worth when it left your hands, since the thing itself can no longer be returned.
Why the third-party buyer is protected
The rule deliberately spares the outside buyer or mortgagee. A person who acquired the property from the donee, often without any knowledge of a future family quarrel, should not lose what he paid for because of ingratitude that happened between donor and donee. The law channels your remedy back to the donee, who is the one who both received your generosity and disposed of it. That is why Article 767 speaks of value which he cannot recover from third persons: your right reaches the donee's pocket, not the innocent purchaser's title.
What this does not give you
This remedy does not undo the sale, does not make the buyer a party to your dispute, and does not entitle you to more than the value fixed at the time of the donation. It also depends on a valid revocation for ingratitude in the first place; without a proper ground and a timely revocation, there is no claim to press. And because it is a personal claim for value against the donee, its practical worth also depends on the donee actually having means to pay. The article gives you a right to be made whole in money, not a guarantee that the money is there.