Short answer. No, generally not. Article 1401 says that when the right to annul is based on a contracting party's incapacity, the loss of the thing does not obstruct the action, unless the loss happened through the fraud or fault of the plaintiff bringing the case.
What the law says
If the right of action is based upon the incapacity of any one of the contracting parties, the loss of the thing shall not be an obstacle to the success of the action, unless said loss took place through the fraud or fault of the plaintiff.
Civil Code, Article 1401 — Loss Extinguishing the Annulment Action. Read the full provision →
The general rule: loss through the plaintiff's own fault kills the action
Article 1401 starts with the ordinary rule for annulment actions generally: the action for annulment of contracts shall be extinguished when the thing which is the object thereof is lost through the fraud or fault of the person who has a right to institute the proceedings. If the plaintiff himself caused the loss through his own wrongdoing or carelessness, the law does not let him then turn around and use the annulment action, since restoring the parties to their original position would no longer be possible in a way fairly attributable to the defendant.
Incapacity-based actions get special treatment
Your situation falls under the article's specific carve-out. Where the right of action is based upon the incapacity of any one of the contracting parties — as with your annulment grounded on your own incapacity — the article states that the loss of the thing shall not be an obstacle to the success of the action. This means the ordinary loss-extinguishes-the-action rule does not apply the same way; the incapacity ground is treated as strong enough that the mere disappearance of the object does not defeat your case, whatever the practical effect the loss has on restoring the parties to their original positions.
The exception still applies to your own misconduct
This protection is not unconditional. The article immediately qualifies it: the loss remains harmless to your case unless said loss took place through the fraud or fault of the plaintiff. So even in an incapacity-based action, if you yourself caused the object's loss through fraud or fault, that reintroduces the obstacle the article otherwise removes. The favorable treatment for incapacity claims exists to protect someone who could not fully protect their own interests when contracting, not to shield a plaintiff who separately caused the loss through his own wrongdoing. If the loss instead happened through the other party's fault, an accident, or simple misfortune, that exception does not apply to you.