960. Any disposition of property such as sale and purchase on the
part of interdicted persons referred to it in the preceding Articles, is
invalid. Such persons, moreover, must immediately make good any loss caused by
their own acts.
Example:- If A, even though he may be a young person of
imperfect understanding, destroys property belonging to B, he must make good the
loss.
961. Upon the court declaring a prodigal and a person in debt to
be interdicted, the reason for such interdiction must be given, and announced in
public.
962. It is not essential that the person whom the court intends
to interdict should be present. He may validly be interdicted in his absence.
Such person must, however, be informed of the interdiction; and the interdiction
does not take effect until he has been so informed. Consequently, any contracts
or admissions made by him up to that date are valid.
963. Provided he has not squandered his property, a person of
dissolute character may not be interdicted solely by reason of his dissolute
conduct.
964. Persons who cause injury to the public, such as an ignorant
physician, may also be interdicted. In such cases, however, the object of the
interdiction is to restrain them from practice, and not to prohibit them from
dealing with their property.
965. No person who carries on business or trade in the market may
be restrained from carrying on the same by reason of the fact that other persons
carrying on such business or trade allege that their work is being ruined
thereby.
SECTION II. MATTERS RELATING TO MINOR, LUNATICS AND IMBECILES.
966. A minor of imperfect understanding may not in any manner make any valid
disposition of his property, even through his tutor assents thereto.
967. Any disposition of property entered into by a minor of
imperfect understanding, which is purely for his own benefit, such as the
acceptance of gift and presents, is valid, even though his tutor does not assent
thereto. Any disposition of property, however, which is purely to his own
disadvantage, such as bestowing a thing upon another by way of gift, is invalid,
even though the tutor assents thereto. But in the case of contracts where it is
not certain whether they will be for his benefit or disadvantage, such contracts
are concluded subject to the permission of the tutor. The tutor has the option
of giving or withholding his consent. Thus, if he thinks that it is to the
advantage of the minor, he will give his consent, and not otherwise.
Example:- A minor of perfect understanding sells certain property without
permission. The execution of the sale is subject to the assent of his tutor,
even though he has sold it for a price which is greater than the value thereof,
the reason being that the contract of sale is one where it is not certain
whether it will be for his advantage or disadvantage.
968. Tutor may give a minor of perfect understanding a portion of
his property on trial with which to engage in business, and if it turns out as a
result that he is of mature mind, he may deliver him the balance of such
property. Article
969. The repeated conclusion of contracts from which the
intention to make profit may be inferred, amounts to permission to engage in
business.
Example:- A tutor tell a minor to engage in business, or to buy
and sell property of a certain nature. This amounts to permission to engage in
business. But if he merely authorises him to conclude a single contract, as
where he states that certain things are to be found in the market and tells him
to buy them, or tells him to sell a certain thing, such act does not amount to
permission to engage in business, but the tutor is considered to have employed
such minor as agent in accordance with custom.
970. Permission given by the tutor may not be made subject to any
condition as to time and place, or limited to any particular type of
business.
Example:-
(1). The tutor gives permission to a minor of perfect understanding for a period
of one day or one month. The minor has full and absolute permission, and may act
for all time, until the tutor makes him interdicted.
(2) The tutor tells the minor to engage in trade in a certain market. The minor
may engage in trade anywhere.
(3). The tutor tell the minor to buy and sell property of a particular sort. The
minor may buy and sell any sort of property.
971. Permission may be given explicitly or by implication.
Example:- A minor of perfect understanding engages in business with the
knowledge of his tutor, who makes no comment thereon and does not prohibit him
from so doing. The tutor has given him permission by implication.
972. When permission is given to a minor by his tutor, such minor
is considered to have arrived at the age of puberty in respect to the matters
included in the permission. Contract such as those relating to sale and hire are
valid.
973. A tutor who has given permission to a minor may later revoke
such permission by making the minor interdicted, but the interdiction must take
the same from as the permission. Example:- A tutor gives a general permission to
a minor to engage in business. After this permission has become known to people
in the market, he wishes to make the minor interdicted. The interdiction must in
the same way be made general, and must be made known to the majority of the
people in the market. It is not enough for him to be made interdicted in his own
house in the presence of two or three persons.
974. The tutor of a minor in this connection is
(1) His father.
(2). If his father is dead, the guardian chosen, that is to say, the guardian
chosen and appointed by the father during his lifetime.
(3). If the guardian chosen is dead, then the guardian appointed by him during
his life time.
(4). The true ancestor, that is to say, the father of the father of the minor,
or the father of the father of his father.
(5). The The guardian chosen and appointed by such ancestor during his lifetime.
(6). The guardian appointed by such guardian.
(7). The court, or the guardian appointed, that is to say, the guardian
appointed by the court.
Any permission given by a brother, or an uncle, or other relative who are not
guardians, is invalid.
975. If the Court deems it in the interest of a minor that he
allowed to dispose of property, and a senior tutor of such minor refuses to give
permission, the Court may give the minor permission to do so, and no other tutor
may under any circumstances make such minor interdicted.
976. In the event of the death of a tutor who has given
permission to a minor, thee permission which he has given becomes void. BUt the
permission given by the Court does not becomes null and void by reason of the
death or dismissal of the judge.
977. A minor who has been granted permission by the Court may be
interdicted by such Court or by the successor of the judge who granted such
permission. The father, or any other tutor, however, may not make the minor
interdicted after the death or dismissal of such judge.
978. An imbecile is considered to be a minor of perfect
understanding.
979. Lunatics who are continuously mad are considered to be minor
of imperfect understanding.
980. Acts of disposition over property by lunatics who are not
continuously mad, and performed during a lucid interval, are like acts of
disposition over property performed by the sane person.
981. When a young person arrives at the age of puberty, there
should be no undue haste in handing his property to him, but his capacity should
be put to test. and if it turns out that he is of mature mind, his property
should then be given to him.
982. If a young person who is not of mature mind arrives at the
age of puberty, his property should not be handed to him and he should be
prohibited as previously from dealing with the, until it has been proved that
the is of mature mind.
983. If property is handed by a guardian to a minor before it has
been proved that he is of mature mind, and such property is lost while in the
possession of the minor, or the minor destroys the same, the guardian must make
good the loss.
984. If property is handed to a minor upon his reaching the age
of puberty, and if is later proved that he is a prodigal, such person shall be
interdicted by the Court.
985. Puberty is proved by the emission of seed during dreams, by
the power to make pregnant, by, menstruation, and by the capacity to
conceive.
986. The commencement of the age of puberty in the case of males
is twelve years completed and in the case of females nine years completed. The
termination of the age of puberty in both cases is fifteen years completed. If a
male on reaching twelve have not arrived at the age of puberty, they are said to
be approaching puberty until such time as they do in fact arrive at the age of
puberty.
987. Any person who upon reaching the termination of the age of
puberty, shows no signs of puberty, is considered in law to have arrived at the
age of puberty.
988. If any young person who has not arrived at the commencement
at the age of puberty brings an action to prove that he has in fact arrived at
the age of puberty, such action shall not be heard.
989. If a male of female approaching the age of puberty admit in
Court that they have arrived at the age of puberty, and the condition of their
bodies shows that their admission is false, such admission shall not be
confirmed. If, however, the condition of their bodies shows that their admission
is true, their admission should be confirmed, and that their contracts and
admissions are executory and valid. If such persons later state that at the time
they made the admission they had not arrived at the age of puberty, and seek to
annul any disposition they may have made over their property, no attention shall
be paid thereto.
SECTION III. INTERDICTED PRODIGALS.
990. An interdicted
prodigal is, as regards his civil transactions, like a minor of perfect
understanding. The court alone, however, may be the tutor of the prodigal. The
father, ancestor and guardians have no right of tutorship over him.
991. Any disposition of property by the prodigal after
interdiction as regards his civil transactions are invalid. Any such
dispositions made prior to the interdiction are the same as those of other
people.
992. Any expenditure necessary for the interdicted prodigal or
for those dependent upon him for support may be made from his own property.
993. If the interdicted prodigal sells property, such sale is not executory. If the
court thinks that any benefit may be derived therefrom, however, it may validate
such sale.
994. An admission made by an interdicted prodigal of a debt due
to another is absolutely invalid, that is to say, any admission made in respect
to property in existence at the time the interdiction was declared, or accruing
thereafter, is without effect.
995. Any claim which any person may have against an interdicted
prodigal shall be paid from the prodigal's property.
996. If an interdicted prodigal borrows money and uses it for his
personal expenditure, and the amount thereof is not excessive, the Court shall
repay such money from the prodigal's property. If it is excessive, however, the
Court shall estimate the amount necessary for his maintenance and disallow the
rest.
997. If the interdicted prodigal reforms, the interdiction may be
removed by the Court.
SECTION IV. INTERDICTION OF DEBTORS.
998. If it is clear to the Court that the debtor is putting off paying his
creditors, although he is able to pay, and the creditors ask the court to sell
the property of the debtor and pay his debts therefrom, the Court shall prohibit
the debtor from dealing with his property.
Should the debtor himself refuse to sell his property and pay his debts
therefrom, the Court shall do so. The Court shall begin by selling those things
which are most advantageous to the debtor.
The Court shall first deal with the cash assets and if these are not sufficient
the merchandise, and if that is not sufficient, the real property of the
debtor.
999. If the debtor is bankrupt, that is to say, if his debts are
equal to or exceed his property, and the creditors fear that his property will
be lost by trading, or that he will dispose of his property in fraud of his
creditors, or that he will make it over to some other person, they may make
application to the Court and ask for such person to be prohibited from dealing
with his property or admitting a debt to some other person, and the Court shall
then declare the debtor to be interdicted and shall sell his property and divide
the proceeds among the creditors. One or two suits of clothes shall be left for
the debtor. If the debtor's clothes, however, are expensive, and it is possible
to do with less expensive clothes, such clothes shall be sold and a suit of
cheap clothes shall be bought from the sum realised and the balance should be
paid to the creditors. Again, if the debtor has a large country house and a
smaller one is sufficient for him, such country house shall be sold and a
suitable dwelling purchased from the sum realised, and the balance given to the
creditors.
1000. Any expenditure necessary for the maintenance of an
insolvent debtor during the period of his interdiction, or for persons dependent
upon him for support, shall be paid from the debtor's property.
1001. Interdiction on account of debt only applies to property of the debtor
in existence at the time the interdiction was declared. It does not apply to any
property accruing to the debtor after the interdiction.
1002. The interdiction applies to anything likely to destroy the
rights of the creditors, such as making gifts and bestowing alms and selling
property at less than the estimated value. Consequently, any contracts entered
into by a bankrupt debtor which are prejudicial to the rights of creditors, and
other dispositions of property and gifts, are invalid in respect to property
which existed at the time the interdiction was pronounced. They are valid,
however, in respect to a debt relating to any property in existence at the time
the interdiction was pronounced. They are valid, however, in respect to property
acquired after the interdiction was pronounced. Any admission made to any other
person in respect to a debt relating to any property in existence at the time
the interdiction was pronounced, is invalid. After the interdiction has been
removed, however, the admission is valid, and he is liable to make payment
thereof. If he acquires property after the interdiction has been pronounced, an
admission that he will make payment therefrom is executory.
CHAPTER II. CONSTRAINT.
1003. The person who causes constraint must be capable of carrying out his threat.
Consequently, the threat of any person who is unable to put such threat into
execution, is considered to be of no effect.
1004. The person who is the subject of constraint must be afraid of the
occurrence of the event with which he is threatened. That is to say, he must
have become convinced that the person causing the constraint would carry out his
threat in the event of his failing to do what he was being constrained to
do.
1005. Constraint is considered to be effective if the person who is the subject of
such constraint performs the act he has been forced to do, in the presence of
the person causing constraint, or of his representative. But if he performs such
act in the absence of the person causing the constraint or of his
representative, such act is not considered to have been caused by constraint
since he has performed the act freely after the cessation of the constraint.
Example:- A brings constraint to bear on B to oblige him to sell property to
C. B sells the property to C. in the absence of A or of his representative. The
sale is considered to be valid and the constraint ineffective.
1006. Contracts of sale, purchase, hire, gift, transfer of real
property, settlement in regard to property, admission, release, postponement of
debt and renunciation of a right of pre-emption, if entered into as a result of
effective constraint, are invalid, whether caused by major constraint or minor
constraint. If the person subject to constraint ratifies the contract after the
cessation of the constraint, such contract is valid.
1007. Major constraint applies not only to cases of formal
dispositions of property as referred to above, but also to dispositions of
property by conduct. Minor constraint, however, only applies to formal
dispositions of property and not to dispositions of property by conduct.
Consequently, if a person tells another to destroy the property of a certain
person or he will murder him, or destroy one of his limbs, and the person who is
subject of such constraint does destroy the property, the constraint is
effective and the person responsible for the constraint alone may be called upon
to make good the loss. But if a person tells another to destroy property of a
certain person, or he will strike him or imprison him and he does destroy such
property, the constraint is not effective, and the person destroying such
property alone may be called upon to make good the loss.
CHAPTER III. PRE-EMPTION.
SECTION 1. DEGREES OF PRE-EMPTION.
1008. There are three causes of pre-emption.
(1). Where a person is the joint owner of the property sold itself. As where two
persons jointly own an undivided share of real property.
(2). Where a person is part of a servitude in the thing sold. As where a person
shares is a private right of taking water or in a private road. (see 3rd at the
end of Examples)
Examples:-
(1) One of several gardens each having shares in a private right of taking water
is sold. Each of the owners of the other gardens obtains a right of pre-emption,
whether they are adjoining neighbours or not.
(2) A house opening on to a private road is sold. Each of the owners of the
other houses giving on to the private road obtains a right of pre-emption,
whether they are adjoining neighbours or not.
But if a house taking water from a river which is open to the use of the public
or the doors of which give on to a public road is sold, the owners of the other
houses taking water from such river, or which give on to the public road, do not
possess any right of pre-emption.
(3) Where a person is adjoining neighbour to the thing sold.
1009. The right of pre-emption belongs:
First, to the person who is a joint owner of the thing sold.
Second, to the person who is a joint owner of the servitude over the thing sold.
Third, to the adjoining neighbour.
If the first person claims his right of pre-emption, the others lose theirs. If
the second person claims his right of pre-emption, the third person loses
his.
1010. If a person is not a joint owner of the thing sold, or if,
being a joint owner, he has renounced his right of pre-emption, and there is a
person who has a share in a servitude in the thing sold, such person possesses a
right of pre-emption. Should there be no person having a servitude in the thing
sold, or, should there be one, and such person renounces his right thereto, the
right of pre-emption accrues to the adjoining neighbour.
q Example:- A sells
real property which he owns in absolute ownership to the exclusion of any other
person, or A, being a joint owner of real property, sells his undivided jointly
owned share therein and his partner relinquishes his right of pre-emption to
such real property, and there is a person enjoying a private right of taking
water who is part owner is a servitude over a private road. The right of pre-emption
belongs to such person. Should there be no such person, or, in the event
of there being such a person, that person relinquishes his right thereto, the
right of pre-emption accrues to the adjoining neighbour.
1011. Where the upper portion, that is, the top storey belongs to
one person and the lower portion, that is the lower storey of a building belongs
to another, such persons are considered to be adjoining neighbours.
1012. Where a person is joint owner of the wall of a house, he is
considered to be joint owner of such house. And if, while not being joint owner
of the wall, the beams of his own house rest upon his neighbour's wall, he is
considered to be an adjoining neighbour. The mere fact, however, that such
person enjoys the right of putting the ends of his beams upon such wall does not
entitle him to be considered as a joint owner or as a person sharing in a
servitude over such property.
1013. Should there be several persons enjoying a right of pre-
emption, they are dealt with according to their numbers and not according to the
number of parts, that is shares, which they hold.
Example:- A holds a half
share in a house, and B and C hold a third and sixth share respectively. In the
event of the owner of the half share selling such share to another person, and
of B and C claiming the right of pre-emption, the half share is divided between
them equally. B, the owner of the share of one third, may not claim to have a
larger share granted to him on the basis of his prior holding.
1014. Where two classes of persons having joint shares in a
servitude come together, the particular take precedence over the general.
Example:-
(1). Where a person who is the owner of a garden owned in absolute ownership,
situated on land enjoying the right of taking water from a creek opening from a
small river to which a right of taking water is also attached sells such garden,
those persons having a right of taking water from the creek have a prior right
of pre-emption. But if a person who is owner of a garden owned in absolute
ownership situated on land enjoying the right of taking water from such
river,sells his garden, all persons enjoying the right of taking water, whether
from the river, or from the creek, possess a right of pre-emption.
(2). A person who is the owner of a house held in absolute ownership the door of
which opens on to a blind alley which branches off from another blind alley,
sells such house. Those persons the of whose houses open on to the branch blind
alley possess a right of pre-emption. But if the owner of a house the door of
which opens on to the principal blind alley sells such house, all persons having
a right of way, whether over the principal or branch blind alley, possess a
right of pre-emption.
1015. If the owner of a garden possessing a private right of
taking water sells such garden without the right of taking water, those persons
who share in the right of taking water cannot claim a right of pre-emption. The
same principle is applied in the case of a private road.
1016. A right of taking water is preferred to a right of way.
Therefor, if upon the sale of a garden in respect of which one person is the
joint owner of a private right of taking water and another of a private right of
way attaching thereto, the owner of the right of taking water is preferred to
the owner of the right of way.
SECTION II. CONDITIONS ATTACHING TO THE RIGHT OF PRE-EMPTION.
1017. The property to which the right of pre-emption attaches must be real property held in absolute
ownership. Therefore, no right of pre-emption can attach to a ship or other
movable property, nor to real property which has been dedicated to pious
purposes, nor to state land.
1028. The property on account of which the right of pre-emption
is claimed must also be held in absolute ownership. Consequently, upon the sale
of real property held in absolute ownership, the trustee or tenant of adjacent
real property which has been dedicated to pious purposes cannot claim a right of
pre-emption.
1019. No right of pre-emption may be claimed in respect to trees
and buildings held in absolute ownership and situated on land dedicated to pious
purposes, or on state land, since these are regarded as movable property.
1020. In the event of a piece of land held in absolute ownership
being sold together with the trees and buildings standing thereon, such trees
and buildings, since they follow the land, are also subject to the right of pre-emption.
But if such trees and buildings alone are sold, no right of pre-emption
can be claimed.
1021. Pre-emption can only be established by a contract of sale.
1022. A gift subject to compensation is regarded as a sale.
Consequently, if a person who is the owner of a house in absolute ownership
bestows such house upon another by way of gift subject to compensation and gives
delivery thereof, this adjoining neighbour has a right of pre-emption.
1023. No right of pre-emption attaches to real property given to
others in absolute ownership without payment, as in cases of gift without right
of compensation, inheritance, or bequest.
1024. The person claiming the right of pre-emption must not have
agreed to the sale which has been concluded, either expressly or by
implication.
Examples:-
(1). If A, upon hearing of the conclusion of the sale expresses his concurrence
therein, he loses his right of pre-emption, and he may not thereafter claim any
such right.
(2). If A, after having heard of the conclusion of the sale, seeks to buy or to
hire the property to which the right of pre-emption attaches from the purchaser,
he loses his right of pre-emption.
Similarly, no right of pre-emption can be claimed by a person who has sold real
property as agent for some other person. ( see Article 100).
1025. The price must consist of property the amount of which is
clearly ascertained. Consequently, there is no right of pre-emption is respect
of real property transferred in absolute ownership for a price which does not
consist of property.
Examples:-
(1). A sells a house which he owns in absolute ownership for the rent accruing
from the letting of a bath. No right of pre-emption can be claimed because in
this case the price of the house in not clearly ascertained, but in rent which
is in the nature of an interest.
(2). There is no right of pre-emption in respect to real property held in
absolute ownership and which is given as a marriage portion.
1026. The vendor must have divested himself of his absolute
ownership in the thing sold. Consequently, in the case of a voidable sale, so
long as the vendor retains the right to demand the return of the thing sold,
there is no right of pre-emption. In the case of sale subject to an option,
however, there is a right of pre-emption if the person possessing the option is
the purchaser only. If the vendor has a right of option, however, there is no
right of pre-emption until the vendor has divested himself of his right of
option. But the existence of an option for defect or for inspection is no bar to
the assertion of a right of pre-emption.
1027. There is no right of pre-emption upon the division of real
property.
Example:- If the joint owners of a house jointly owned divide
such house among themselves, the adjoining neighbour has no right of pre-
emption.
SECTION III. THE CLAIM OF PRE-EMPTION.
1028. Three claims must be made in cases of pre-emption.
(1). A claim made immediately upon hearing of the sale;
(2). A claim made formally and in the presence of witnesses;
(3). A claim that the person alleging the right of pre-emption is entitled to
bring an action and to be granted absolute ownership of the property.
1029. The person claiming the right of pre-emption must at the
moment he heard of the conclusion of the sale, make a statement showing that he
claims the right of pre-emption, as by saying that he is the person who has the
right of the property sold subject to pre-emption, or that he claims the
property by way of pre-emption. The claim is referred to as the claim made
immediately upon hearing of the sale.
1030. After having made a claim immediately upon hearing of the
sale, the person claiming the right of pre-emption must make a claim formally
and in the presence of witnesses.
Thus, such person must say in the presence of two witnesses, and by the side of
the property sold, that such and such a person has bought the real property in
question, or, being by the side of the purchaser, must say that such person has
bought such and such a piece of real property or, if the property sold is still
in the possession of the vendor, must say by the side of the vendor that the
latter has sold the real property in question to such and such a person, but
that he has a right of pre-emption thereto, and that he calls such person to
witness that he has made a further claim at that moment.
If the person claiming the right of pre-emption is in some distant place and is
not in a position personally to make a claim formally and in the presence of
witnesses, he may appoint a person as his agent to do so. If he is unable to
find an agent, he may send a letter.
1031. After having made a claim formally and in the presence of witnesses, the
person claiming the right of pre-emption must make a claim before the court and
bring a action. This is called a claim to bring an action and to be granted
absolute ownership of the property.
1032. If the person claiming the right of pre-emption delays in
making his claim immediately upon hearing of the sale, he loses his right of
pre-emption at the moment he hears of the sale, but behaves in a manner tending
to show that he does not intend to pursue his claim such as dealing with some
other matter, or engaging in conversation regarding a different subject, or if
he goes away without making any claim to pre-emption whatsoever, such person
loses his right of pre-emption.
1033. If the person claiming the right of pre-emption delays in making his
claim formally and in the presence of witnesses for any time longer that is
necessary for him to act, even though it be by letter, such person loses his
right of pre-emption.
1034. If the person claiming the right of pre-emption delays
without any legal excuse, as where he is in some other country, for more than
one month in making a claim formally and in the presence of witnesses, such
person loses his right of pre-emption.
1035. The tutor of an interdicted person may claim the right of
pre-emption of behalf of such person. If a tutor fails to claim a right of
pre-emption on behalf of a minor, such minor is not entitled to claim by way of
pre-emption after he has reached the age of puberty.
SECTION IV. THE EFFECT OF PRE-EMPTION.
1036. The person who is entitled to a right of pre-emption becomes owner of the property to which
such right attaches, either by the purchaser handing over such property as the
result of mutual agreement, or by virtue of a judgement issued by the court.
1037. The act of taking over property held in absolute ownership,
by way of pre-emption, is equivalent to buying such property in the first
instance.
Consequently, rights which are valid in the case of original purchase, such as
the option of inspection and the option for defect, are also valid in the case
of pre-emption.
1038. If the person claiming the right of pre-emption dies after
having made both the immediate and formal claims, but without becoming the owner
of the property to which the right of pre-emption attaches owing to such
property having been handed over by the purchaser either by way of mutual
agreement or as the result of a judgement of the court, the right of pre-emption
is not transferred to his heirs.
1039. If the person claiming the right of pre-emption sells the
property by virtue of which he holds a right of pre-emption after having made
the two claims a set out above, but without having become owner of the property
to which the right of pre-emption attaches, such person loses his right of pre-emption.
1040. If a piece of real property held in absolute ownership
adjoining property subject to the right of pre-emption is sold before the person
claiming the right of pre-emption attaches as set out above, such person person
cannot claim a right of pre-emption in the second piece of real property.
1041. Pre-emption does not admit of division. Consequently, the
person claiming the right of pre-emption has no right to reject a portion of the
property to which the right of pre-emption attaches and take the rest.
1042. None of the holders of a right of pre-emption may bestow
their right upon other holders by way of gift. If they do so, their right of
pre-emption is lost.
1042. If any holder of a right of pre-emption relinquishes such
right prior to the judgement of the court, any other person possessing a right
of pre-emption may take the whole of the real property to which the right of
pre-emption attaches. If any holder of a right of pre-emption relinquishes his
right of pre-emption after judgement by the court, such person's right does not
accrue to any other person holding a right of pre-emption.
1044. If the purchaser adds something to the building to which the right of
pre-emption attaches, such as paint, the person possessing the right of pre-
emption has the option either of leaving such building or of taking it and
paying the price of such addition, together with the price of the building. If
the purchaser has erected buildings upon the real property to which the right of
pre-emption attaches, or has planted trees thereon, the holder of the right of
pre-emption has an option of leaving such real property, or of taking it and
paying the price thereof together with the value of such buildings and trees. If
he does not do so, he cannot force the purchaser to pull down the buildings and
uproot the trees.