Short answer. No. Article 553 says the person recovering possession is not obliged to pay for improvements that have already ceased to exist by the time possession is recovered. If the improvement is gone by then, there is nothing left for the recovering owner to be made to pay for.
What the law says
One who recovers possession shall not be obliged to pay for improvements which have ceased to exist at the time he takes possession of the thing.
Civil Code, Article 553 — Improvements No Longer Existing. Read the full provision →
The improvement has to actually exist when possession is recovered
Article 553 ties the obligation to pay for improvements to a specific moment in time. It states that "one who recovers possession shall not be obliged to pay for improvements which have ceased to exist at the time he takes possession of the thing." The relevant question is not whether the improvement once existed while you were in possession, but whether it still exists at the moment the property changes hands back to the recovering party.
Why the law measures things this way
Reimbursement for improvements is meant to compensate the recovering owner's actual gain — the owner is asked to pay because they are receiving something of added value along with the property. If the improvement no longer exists by the time the owner takes possession, there is no added value for the owner to receive, and requiring payment anyway would make the owner pay for something that provides no benefit at all. The rule keeps reimbursement tied to a real, present benefit rather than a benefit that existed only in the past.
The reason the improvement disappeared can still matter elsewhere
This article addresses reimbursement for the improvement itself; it does not necessarily resolve every question that might arise from how or why the improvement ceased to exist. If the improvement was destroyed through your own fault, negligence, or intentional act while you were still in possession, that conduct could potentially raise separate questions under other legal principles, even though Article 553 itself simply removes the obligation to pay for something that is no longer there when possession is recovered.
What this means for your specific situation
If the improvements you made no longer exist by the time you return the property, Article 553 supports the position that you cannot demand payment for them from the person recovering possession, since there is nothing tangible left for that reimbursement to attach to. Documenting when and how the improvements ceased to exist can still be useful, both to confirm that Article 553 genuinely applies to your situation and to address any separate questions the other party might raise about why the improvements are gone.