Short answer. No. If you lawfully recover possession that was unjustly taken from you, the law treats you as though you never lost it. The intervening years are counted in your favour for every purpose that benefits you, so the interruption does not reset the clock on rights you were already building up.
What the law says
One who recovers, according to law, possession unjustly lost, shall be deemed for all purposes which may redound to his benefit, to have enjoyed it without interruption.
Civil Code, Article 561 — Recovered Possession Counts as Unbroken. Read the full provision →
What the rule actually does
The Civil Code creates a legal fiction. Once you recover possession that was unjustly lost, the period during which someone else physically held the property is treated as if it never happened — as far as your own benefit is concerned. You are deemed to have possessed the thing continuously from the beginning. That matters most where the law rewards length of possession: the counting of time towards acquisitive prescription, the character of your possession as uninterrupted, and any right that depends on how long you have held. The dispossession becomes, in law, a gap that closes behind you rather than a break that starts you over.
The two conditions: unjustly lost, lawfully recovered
Both halves of the rule carry weight. The possession must have been unjustly lost — taken by force, stealth, deceit or some other wrong, not surrendered voluntarily, sold, abandoned or lost through your own valid agreement. And the recovery must be according to law. Recovering the property by taking it back by force, or by intimidating whoever holds it, is not recovery according to law; it is a fresh wrong that can expose you to criminal and civil liability of your own. The protected route is the courts: the summary possessory actions for recent dispossession, or the ordinary actions for recovering possession or ownership where more time has passed.
What this rule does not give you
The fiction runs one way only. It applies to purposes which may redound to your benefit, so it cannot be used against you — an opponent cannot invoke it to charge you with obligations, taxes or liabilities that accrued during years when you were in fact shut out. Nor does it decide who owns the property. It is a rule about the continuity of possession, not a rule of ownership, and someone with a better title can still prevail against you on the merits. It also does not excuse sleeping on your rights: if the deadline for the possessory action you are entitled to bring has already run, this article does not revive it.
What to do if you have been shut out
Act quickly and on paper. Record when and how you were dispossessed, who did it, and what you were doing with the property before then — tax declarations, receipts, utility bills, photographs and the statements of neighbours all help establish that your possession was real and continuous. Make a written demand rather than a confrontation. Because the summary remedies for recent dispossession carry short deadlines while ordinary recovery actions do not, the choice of action depends heavily on the date you were ousted, and getting it wrong can cost the case. If your property has been taken from you, book a consultation so the right action can be filed in time.