[On the Rightful Claim to the Sold Item]

Mufti:

Alsayyed Muhammad b. Abdallah Awad Al-Muayyady

تاريخ النشر: January 21, 2026

Fatwa number: 20472

Number of views: 1

Print the fatwa:

[On the Rightful Claim to the Sold Item]

Fatwa number: 20472

Question: A man bought from another a plot of land for a known price. A third man—who had been the seller to this seller—came and took possession of (consumed) that plot. Disputes arose between the (present) seller and the original seller, and also between the (present) seller and the buyer. Four years passed. Finally, the second seller received compensation from the first seller—namely, a plot of land in another town—and he obtained nothing more than that after disputes, contention, and intermediaries. What is due to the last purchaser, noting that he insists on demanding the land he bought, or its equivalent in the same location? Note also that the seller claims he is a partner in the property sold, whereas the purchaser denies this and says it was a private sale to him excluding the seller [as partner].

Answer—and from Allah is success: If it is established that the seller and purchaser were partners in the property sold, then the compensation the seller obtained from the first seller is shared between them according to their original shares, and nothing more is due to the purchaser.
If it is established that the seller is not a partner in the property sold and that it is specific to the purchaser, then if the seller is unable to deliver the sold property to the purchaser, and cannot recover it from the first seller after attempting to do so, he must return the price he took; nothing more is due to the purchaser.
If the seller had guaranteed to the purchaser that he would replace what had failed or become void—“Al-Hablah(Al-Hablah: is an area of five meters by fice meters.) by Al-Hablah [the rope by the rope] and the cubit by the cubit”—in the specified location, that does not bind and is not valid according to the madhhab, as in the marginalia of Sharḥ al-Azhār.
This may be substantiated by the fact that the contract of sale was concluded for a specific identified item. The stipulation made in that contract—that if the sold item fails, the seller must replace it in the specified or unspecified place, and that the parties’ consent to this counts as another contract for another sold item different from the first—renders that latter contract invalid, because it did not conclude at the time of contracting. The condition for the validity of contracts is that their object take effect immediately; if its taking effect is deferred to the future, the contract is not valid. Such is the nature of contracts.
Source: Min Thimār al-ʿIlm wa al-Ḥikmah vol.2