Short answer. Yes. Under the Family Code, when mortgaged property given as a donation by reason of marriage is foreclosed and sold for more than the total amount of the obligation it secured, the donee — meaning you, as the recipient of the gift — is legally entitled to keep that excess.
What the law says
If the property is sold for more than the total amount of said obligation, the donee shall be entitled to the excess.
Family Code, Article 85 — Donations of Encumbered Property. Read the full provision →
Encumbered property can still be a valid wedding gift
Article 85 begins by confirming something that might otherwise seem doubtful: donations by reason of marriage of property that is already subject to an encumbrance — such as an existing mortgage — are valid. A gift given in contemplation of marriage does not fail simply because the property carries a debt attached to it. The article then goes on to address exactly what happens when that encumbrance is eventually foreclosed, which is the situation behind your question.
If the sale falls short, you are not on the hook
The article's middle rule protects the donee from an unpleasant surprise: if the foreclosure sale brings in less than the total amount of the secured obligation, the donee is not liable for the deficiency. In other words, you would not be required to pay the difference out of your own pocket just because you received the property as a gift. The risk of a shortfall stays with the obligation and whoever is otherwise responsible for it, not with you as the donee.
If the sale brings in more, the excess is yours
The rule that answers your question directly is the third sentence: when the property is sold for more than the total obligation it secured, the donee is entitled to the excess. So if the bank's foreclosure sale generates proceeds beyond what was owed, that surplus does not automatically go to the mortgagor, the estate, or the lender — it belongs to you as the person who received the property as a donation by reason of marriage.
Why this rule exists
Article 85 draws a clean, symmetrical line: the donee bears none of the shortfall risk if the sale price is too low, and gets all of the benefit if the sale price is higher than needed to satisfy the debt. This treats the gift itself, rather than the underlying encumbrance, as the thing that ultimately belongs to the donee — the mortgage was simply a claim against the property's value up to the amount owed, and anything beyond that amount was never the lender's or the donor's to keep once the property changed hands as a wedding gift.