Short answer. It depends on whether fruits existed when the land was first sold. If visible or growing fruits were already there and the buyer paid no indemnity for them, the seller who redeems keeps the fruits standing at redemption with no reimbursement. If there were none at the sale but some exist at redemption, they are prorated.
What the law says
Should there have been no fruits at the time of the sale and some exist at the time of redemption, they shall be prorated between the redemptioner and the vendee, giving the latter the part corresponding to the time he possessed the land in the last year, counted from the anniversary of the date of the sale.
Civil Code, Article 1617 — Fruits on Redemption. Read the full provision →
The rule turns on the state of the land at the time of the sale
Article 1617 of the Civil Code does not ask who planted or who harvested. It asks a narrower question: were there visible or growing fruits on the land on the day the sale with right of repurchase was executed? If there were, and the buyer paid nothing extra for them, then neither side reimburses the other for the fruits found on the land at redemption. The law treats the first set of fruits as having been absorbed into the price, and it refuses to reopen that bargain years later. If the buyer did pay an indemnity for those standing fruits at the sale, this no-reimbursement rule does not apply.
When the land was bare at the sale, the harvest is split
The second situation is the common one in farm redemptions. The land carried no fruits when it was sold, the buyer took possession, planted, and a crop is standing when the seller comes to redeem. Here the fruits are prorated. The buyer keeps the share that corresponds to the time he actually possessed the land during the last year, counted from the anniversary of the date of the sale — not from planting, not from harvest, and not from the date the redemption money is tendered. The redeeming seller takes the balance. The arithmetic is a time ratio, so the date of the sale is the single most important fact to pin down.
What this rule does not settle
Article 1617 governs fruits only. It does not fix the redemption price, the period within which the seller may repurchase, or who bears the cost of improvements, taxes and necessary repairs — those are separate rules with their own conditions. It also does not decide whether the transaction was truly a sale with right of repurchase or an equitable mortgage in disguise, which is a frequent fight when the seller stayed on the land or the price was unusually low. And it does not apply to foreclosure redemption, which runs on its own statutory scheme.
Practical points for anyone redeeming
Keep the deed and note the exact date it was executed; the proration hangs on it. Photograph or otherwise record the condition of the land at the sale, because a later dispute usually reduces to whether anything was growing that day. If a crop is standing when you redeem, raise the sharing question in the tender itself rather than after harvest, when the produce has already been sold and traced. Where the parties cannot agree on the split, the fruits may have to be accounted for in the same case that determines the redemption. General information only — how the rule applies depends on your documents and dates.