Short answer. Possibly. Article 1602 presumes a sale with right to repurchase is really an equitable mortgage when the price is unusually inadequate. A price far below the property's actual value is one of the specific circumstances the law treats as evidence the deal was meant to secure a debt.
What the law says
When the price of a sale with right to repurchase is unusually inadequate
Civil Code, Article 1602 — When a Sale Is Really a Mortgage. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The contract shall be presumed to be an equitable mortgage, in any of the following cases
Civil Code, Article 1602 — When a Sale Is Really a Mortgage. Read the full provision →
An unusually low price is the first listed trigger
Article 1602 opens its list of circumstances with the one you are describing. It states that the contract shall be presumed to be an equitable mortgage, in any of the following cases, and the very first is when the price of a sale with right to repurchase is unusually inadequate. If what you received for the property was far below its actual value, that gap between price and value is, by itself, enough to trigger the presumption that the transaction was not a real sale at all.
Why an inadequate price points to a hidden loan
A genuine sale is generally expected to reflect something close to the property's real value, adjusted for ordinary negotiation. When the price is drastically lower than what the property is actually worth, it starts to look less like a sale and more like a loan disguised as one, where the low price functions as security for a debt rather than as genuine consideration for a transfer of ownership. The gap itself becomes evidence that the parties' real intention was different from what the deed says.
One circumstance is enough on its own
You do not need to show every one of the article's listed circumstances together. Any single one, including an unusually inadequate price, is independently sufficient to trigger the presumption of an equitable mortgage. This means that even if nothing else about your transaction looks unusual, a genuinely inadequate price standing alone can be enough to shift how the arrangement is treated under the law, from a completed sale to a disguised security arrangement.
What this means for your transaction
If the price you received was genuinely, substantially below the property's actual value at the time of the sale, Article 1602 gives you a basis to argue the transaction was really an equitable mortgage rather than a true sale, which would mean you remain the owner subject to a debt owed to the buyer rather than someone who permanently gave up the property for that inadequate price. How far below value the price fell, and why, are the kind of details worth documenting carefully.