Click here to get
Hamd-e-Bari Ta'ala and Naat-e-Rasool (sallalahoalaihiwassallam)

MAN By Nature is SOCIAL AND PROMISCUOUS. He lives and thrives through social and contractual need. His needs are so numerous and multidimensional that he, alone and by himself can not fulfill all his needs and desires. He requires some one to help him as he himself helps others to achieve their aim and objects. The Divine Scheme of Creation has this prime objective in view that human beings are born with distinction capabilities that through mutual cooperation that the Divine object of sustenance and development of human progress on earth moves form stage to stage without let and hindrance. The creature urge in one satisfies the accomplishment of material needs of another. This in other words means the everlasting phenomena of "demand and supply", is at the very core of human progress in this world. Some one has his interest centered in commerce and business, someone is inclined to use his intelligence and labour in agriculture, while some others, more capable and qualities, seek their betterment and prosperity in politics or in military professions.

This ever moving phenomena of `give and take' `demand and supply' continue enabled in one way or the other. One of the channels of human want and their satisfaction is the most common practice of Buying and Selling which on account of ever rising level of dealings has become more and more complex and irrigated in number and nature. Islam being the Deen of Divine Ordination has given due importance to this phase of human dealings to their minutest details so that greed and avarice, which by way bargain in commercial transaction may not spoil the purity and sanctity. If one hand, Islam teaches and guides the finer and succinct aspects of worship, social and domestic virtues in our personal and corporate life it on the other hand, has given us detailed and essential instruction and commandants in this most common and important department of human life namely `Business Transaction' or simply `Buying and Selling'.

Just as in matters of religious practices something are permissible or impermissible, halal and haram, in the same way there are phases of halal-o-haram in this branch of human dealings, unless therefore, a person is aware what is good and evil in business he may fall into the ditch of evil and suffer punishment in this world and the Hereafter. There is a clear warning in the Holy Quran,

(Do not eat (usurp) your wealth (assets) with evil unrighteous intention except if it be in trade and business on which you (mutually) agree).

Further it is said,

(East of the permissible and pure from the Provision given to you by Allah and fear Allah in Whom you believe.)

The Holy Prophet (Allah's peace and grace be upon him) has said that `any one who earns Haram wealth if he spends it in the way of Allah (sadaqah), it will not be accepted and if he spends for his benefit, it will carry no blessing and whatever he leaves in the world on his death, will be his assets to go to He'll.'

The Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has also said that the `search and labour for an honest and halal subsistence is a great obligation (farz - ordination by Almighty Allah) after the devotional and religious obligations such as Namaz, Fasting, Haj and Zakat etc.

It is the well know fact to which we are all witnesses that the most common source of earning income (wealth) is through the commerce business or in simple words, through buying and selling things of all kinds, from the very small things to things of huge descriptions and denominations. But in this chapter we are concerned with transaction in things which are of common needs for almost all classes of people, among which are the earnings through honest manual labour. The Prophets of Allah and the great men in the sight of Allah have set examples for others to follow and emulate. In this respect the following few tradition (Hadees) will serve as guidelines of inspiration which will induce and en course the common peoples for setting their life patterns in the most profitable pursuits nor from the mundane points of view but also for earning rewards in the Hereafter.

The Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and pleasure be upon him) has said:

There is food better than that which has been secured through honest and hard manual labour. Surely, Hazarat Dawood (May Allah's peace be on him) earned his subsistence through labour by hand.

One who earns (his living) through honest labour is dear to Allah as a Friend.

On being asked as to what work/source of earning is the best. He replied: The work done by man with his hand, and the honest transaction.

The honest trader and businessman shall be in the company of apostles (Ambia), The Righteous and the Truthful (Siddiqeen) and Martyrs (the Shaheeds who lay down their life for the Cause of Allah).

The traders and dealers shall be raised as addicts of immorality *except that business dealer who is righteous, truthful and does favours to others.

It is for these reasons that the learned scholars (Ulama) has advised and warned people that unless they attain reasonable true and finer knowledge of business transaction, they should not venture to enter this field.

PROBLEM:In the Shariat terminology the word `Bai-e' meaning sale (or buying and selling stands for the transaction which is earned on (1) through exchange of things with things (known in modern language of commerce as BARTER SYSTEM) or (2) exchange of things with money. This transaction is done either through words of mouth or by deeds. In the former case the basic principles are Eajab-o-Qubool (profferment or presentation of things and the acceptance thereof).

(Note: This Eejab-o-Qubool is similarly to ceremony of this very nomenclature at the Time of Nikah between the bride and the bridegroom - Translator).

In the alternative dealing of business known as sale by deeds is done through actual exchange of things through things or cash without uttering words, because sets of things are kept for sale with the prices already announced/made known as a regular practice.

PROBLEM:-n a `buying - selling', one party (may a person or a group of persons) which purchases any thing commodity is called as `Mushtari' or purchaser - buyer, while the other party, that of sellers is called Ba'ye, the seller (the individual or the group). We shall call them as buyer and seller respectively.

PROBLEM:In this deal of buying - selling, there are certain conditions which must be fulfilled before any transaction will be accepted as fair and equitable.

(1) Both the `buyer and seller' should be sensible (of common wisdom or senses), Note: the deal done by lunatics and minor children will not be reed valid.

(2) Transactors / dealers must be different persons. A man can not be a buyer (purchaser) and seller at one and the same time. However the father or the guardian of the minor child (ren)

can do so in that he may sell the goods of the minor child/war on his behalf and purchase it for himself. Or the Qazi may sell the goods on behalf some orphan and purchase the same goods on behalf of other orphan, with a profit. Similarly, a man can be a messenger / agent of both the parties to do the dealing on agreed terms.

(3) The terms of offer (Eejab) and acceptance (Qubool) in respect of goods and price must accord with another. Any variation in this behalf should be agreed mutually.

(4) The transaction of offer (Eejab) and acceptance (Qubool) should take place at the same place and at the same time.

(5) The terms of transaction should be announced and heard by both the buyer and the seller clearly so as to avoid any misunderstanding afterwards.

(6) The things offered for sale should be present/available physically at the time of offer, it should be agreeable and durable (Muta'qaw'wim) in the possession of the seller (mamlok), and transferable and worthy of being given in trust (Maqdoor-ul-Tasleem). For example, the sale of fruits before their appearance is not valid. In the same way the grass in the field can not be sold and the water of the canal or will or the animal of game or funt can not be sold unless they are given possession of physically or materially.

(7) The sale should not be time conditioned ( athing can not be sold for only a given period of time).

(8) The goods offered for sale and the price thereof should be definite and beyond dispute and controversy.

PROBLEM:-In respect of selling what is commanded is that the article of sale should be handed over to the purchaser and the seller should be owner (possessive) of the price value of the things sold. However if the transaction is kept in abeyance till a particular time, then the deal shall be completed when as the appointed time the sale is completed will mutual consent, the exchange of the article and the price come in respective possession.

PROBLEM:-The process of Eejab (offer of sale) and the Qubool (acceptance of sale) is determined in the order of priority, which also confirm the deal in respect of transfer of the article and the price thereof.

PROBLEM:-The agreement of sale and purchase should be either in the past tense (sold, purchased) or in the present tense (I sell, I purchase/buy) or one in the present tense and the other in past tense (I sell, I purchased). But in any case, it should not in the future tense.

PROBLEM:-The terms of purchase must be in clear words. Any condition imposed in business ransaction which may give different interpretation in respect of thing sold/purchased or the mode of payment in cash or in barter exchange will not be correct in terms of these Shariat Laws.

PROBLEM:- Proposal for sale of nay article/good and its affirmation (eijab-o-qubool) must be done in the same sitting. If the man who accepts the sale becomes absent from the sitting, then the whole process becomes void. However if the buyer conveys his affirmation through some person when the sitting is not over, then the deal will be correct.

PROBLEM:- In between the two persons making proposal for sale and the other who accepts, the latter has a right to accept or reject it in the same sitting (This acceptance or rejection of a deal is known as Khay'ar-e-Qabool, the right to accept). There is inheritance in Khayare Qabool meaning that if the buyer dies the deal is complete, then his inheritors can not use the right of the deceased as a matter of course. In that event, the Eijab (presenting for sale) lapses and as such the question of inheritance to use the right of the deceased does not arise.

PROBLEM:- If of the two namely purchaser and the seller, goes away from the sitting (before transaction has taken effect) or the proposer engages himself in some affair other the present deal, then the transaction become void. The seller can withdraw his offer but once the offer has been accepted, it can not the withdrawn.

PROBLEM:- When Eijab-o-Qabool (offer and acceptance0 are over then the transaction becomes complete and binding, now no charge can be made without the consent of the party concerned. It is also necessary that before entering into any bargain both the seller and the buyer must obtain, personally or otherwise satisfaction of one another as regards their merits etc.

PROBLEM:- Articles/goods obtained form shopkeeper on credit and the prices paid according to agreed manner, the transaction in this way is permissible.

Note: The nature of transaction, mentioned at pages 286-287 and terminologies used are either absolute in the present days of Business and Commercial deals have undergone tremendous changes, even otherwise their translator, is too complex and cumber some. These have therefore been skipped over. As a matter of fact almost the entire chapter on Khareed-o-Farokht, is more as a classic record of Shariat laws. Still attempt has been honestly made to reproduce as much Mas'ail (Problems) as the intentions / spirit behind their introduction are still valuable both as guide and for practical purposes.

PROBLEM:- Wheat, rice barley and all others grain, can be sold and purchased on measurement as well by weight, either by actual weighting or by guess. But by guess only the grain is purchased in some other exchange. Sale of Grain for exchange of cash id permissible, but grain for grain must be exchanged by actual weight or measurement, otherwise any quantity becoming more or less than actual quantity will come within the purview of interest (su'd, which is haram). However if the difference in quantity is less than half a saa, then it is permissible because in less than half a saa in weight/measurement does not amount to deal in interest (su'd).

PROBLEM:- When a house is purchased then all the constructed and unremovable articles come with in the purview of sale / purchase shariat laws.

PROBLEM:- When agricultural land is sold, all the small or big trees bearing fruit are all included in the transaction, However a dry tree which is still not uprooted, it is not a part of transaction, it is just a lump or wood lying on the ground, small plants of fruit tress which are removed after some time and planted elsewhere in the farm are included as part of transaction.

PROBLEM:- On purchasing fish if a pearl comes out, then if it is in the shell, it belongs to the buyer. If it is the pearl without the shell, then it should be returned to seller provided the fish was caught in the bait. The pearl will remain a trust (amanat) with the fish catcher. If no trace of its real owner is available, even after due publicity, then the pearl should be sold and the amount given is charity. If a pearl is discovered in the stomach of the hen then it should be returned to the seller.

PROBLEM:- The cultivation /agriculture standing on piece of land belongs to the seller if it is sold without an agreement as regards the crops etc. Similarly the tree/trees bearing fruit on being sold the purchaser will have to make a clear understanding with the seller, otherwise the fruits on the trees in question will go to the seller. These conditions also apply to the plant, of (sweet smelling) flower, prior understanding a right to be reached, before plants are handed over to the buyer.

PROBLEM:- When an agricultural land or a fruit bearing tree is sold, it is obligatory to cut the crop and pluck the fruits before handing over possession to the buyer provided the cost of land/tree is paid, otherwise the seller will be allowed to keep the crops/fruits till the transaction is complete.

PROBLEM:- In the above mentioned if the seller desires to keep the crop/fruits standing for some time and he is prepared to pay the cost thereof, then he can do so with he consent of the buyer.

PROBLEM:- If the tree is purchased with intentions to cut it, then the land below the tree is not included in the deal. However if it is purchased to keep it standing, then the land below the tree is included in the deal and it will go to the purchaser.

PROBLEM:- IF a tree has been purchased with the intentions to cut it down, then the buyer shall be asked to cut and take the tree away. He can not leave it standing. However, if he has purchased the tree to keep it standing, in that case the buyer shall not asked to cut it. If he cuts the tree, he can plant another tree there, because the price of land now belongs to the buyer.

PROBLEM:- To sell the agricultural land before the ripening of the crops on the condition that the land will remain with the seller till the crop is ripe, is impermissible. It is also impermissible in respect of an agricultural where the crop is standing to ask the buyer to let the crop stand till it is ripe for harvesting.

PROBLEM:- In the sale of land, all those things are included which are meant for preservation such as trees, houses, whether there is specific mention in the sale agreement or not, However dry trees bamboos grass are not included as they are not preservable.

PROBLEM:- The sale of orchard (fruit-garden) before the blossoming of flowers buds and the fruits is not permissible, even if some fruits have appeared and the rest are expected (it is also imperssible). The buyers shall have clear the trees by plucking the fruits. He can not be allowed to let all the fruits get ripened before be vacates the tree. However if in more fruits appear after the sale of the tree (which were not included in the sale) then the sale shall become in valid because now there remains no distinction in the sale of the previous an those appearing late. On the event of a decision if so derived, as to which fruits belong to the buyer and the seller, an oath will have to be taken between them.

PROBLEM:- If fruits on at the trees are purchased without mention the condition as to when the fruits be removed from the trees. If the seller permits to pluck the fruits and if more fruits appear, they are the rightful property of the buyer (the rest of the details in this problem are merely hypothetical and a bit complex). The same also applies to the next problem.

PROBLEM:- Part or parts of thing including animal on which exclusive right of the buyer is valid, can be exempted from the sale of that article for example, from the bulk of grains, some quantity can be purchased. It is not obligatory that the whole bulk be purchased. Similarly from the herd of goats, a single goat can be purchased. The things so picked up from the bulk are known as exceptions.

PROBLEM:- If a hose in purchased for demolitions then the exception of wood, bricks (debris) is valid.

PROBLEM:- IF the thing meant for sale is to be measured, weighed or counted and extra payment is to be made on there accounts, then the payment is to be borne by the seller.

The fee for examining the currency in a matter of loan, shall be paid by loan taker.

PROBLEM:- The payment of brokerage to the broker is to be made to by the seller, it the former has arranged the sale of goods with his permission. If the broker has only worked as a middle man and the selling was done by the owner of the goods, then the payment of the brokerage may be done as is customary at that place.

PROBLEM:- The sale of the article is to be done on cash payment on the spot, then the buyer has no right to impose any condition as regards payment or not be quality of the goods/article, without paying the price he can not take possession of the article. The Seller has a right to stop handing over the articles. If the article of sale is not present on the spot, the seller can not demand the cash payment. If the sale is in the form of exchange of goods on both sides, then the articles should be presented simultaneously, to complete the deal.

PROBLEM:- If the purchaser makes some change in the article of purchase for which possession is not necessary, then this change is not valid. If he make the change when possession before payment is necessary, then this change/alteration is permissible.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer keeps the article with some one as a trust or kept it for use temporarily or he lets the seller to keep with some one else which he does, then in all these cases the possession takes place, or he keeps the article with the seller, for temporary use or on hire or he places the article as pawn, after making part payment, then in the latter event, possession does by the buyer does not place.

PROBLEM:- The buyer buys oils and tells the seller to send it to some one by his man, now if the bottles falls and breaks on the way, there the loss shall be of the buyer. However if he tells the shopkeeper with any one of his men and the loss occurs then the loss shall be of the seller.

PROBLEM:- If after purchasing an article it was left with the seller telling him he shall it the next day. Supposing the thing sold was an animal which died during the night. In this case the loss shall be of the seller, because the buyer had not the possession, the purchaser has nothing to do with the loss.

PROBLEM:- A thing was sold but the price was not paid, It was kept with third person with the promise that the buyer will pay the price and take the thing, the thing was lost with the third person. In this case also the loss is of the seller. If that third man after receiving part price he hands over the thing to the buyer of which incident the seller is not aware of , now the seller can take the thing back from the buyer.

PROBLEM:- Suppose a piece of cloth is purchased the price of which has not been paid which would entitle the purchaser to take it in his possession. He told the seller to place the cloth with another person on the plea that the buyer would pay the price. The buyers kept the cloth with the third person where it was lost. In this case also the loss in that of the seller, because the possession is still the seller. Therefore the loss shall be of the seller.

PROBLEM:- In a sale deed any thing change made at the behest the buyer will amount to the possession of the buyer even if m thing remains with the seller and the price has not been paid by the buyer. (The buyer will have to pay the price and take possession of the thing.)

In a sale and purchase transaction is open to both the seller and the buyer not to make a deal as final in the very beginning, but make it condition that the bargain shall be final only all necessary things have been settled and if anything is found wanting the deal will lapse. This is often necessary both for the seller and purchaser because on account of lack of experience or in complete examination/inspection of the goods / article in deal, difficulties and differences arise at some stage which could be avoided if proper precautions were taken before declaring the deal as final. This exercise of authority is known in the Shariat terminology as `Khaya'r-e-Shart) in a foreign language, we shall use the original terminology in this section in subsequent paragraphs (or in short K.S.), K.S. may be used for both the seller and the buyer as the only parties in the deal as it may be for any one of them or any one else as the third party.

PROBLEM:- K.S is not permissible before making a commitment to undertake a deal definitely. If there is a difference of opinion between the buyer and the seller, One says that K.S. was there in the deal while the other denies this, then the party claiming K.S. should be asked to produce witnesses in support of his stand.If he fails to do so, then the other party's stand will be taken as correct.

PROBLEM:- The time limit of K.S. is maximum three days. It can be less, but not more. It the deal is in respect of a thing which is perishable and the buyer has the K.S. for only three days (the thing may not last for that time). In such a case ,the buyer will be asked to cancel the deal or declare the deal as valid (in spite of K.S.). If some one purchase this perishable thing without K.S., but remains absent or disappears without making payment or taking possession, then the seller has the right to deal with another person.

PROBLEM:- If there is no mention of K.S. or the period is not quite clear or any other ambiguous condition then in all there cases K.S. is faulty or inoperative.

PROBLEM:- The time limit for K.S. was fixed for more than three days, but before the expiry of his period the party holding K.S. declares the deal as valid. This is so, but if three days are over to without declaring the deal as valid, then the deal becomes invalid.

PROBLEM:- The buyer said to the seller, `If I do not pay the price with in three days, then the deal between us shall be treated as canceled.' This plea is permissible under K.S. IF he pays the price in time the deal is finalised, otherwise it becomes withdrawn.

PROBLEM:- The seller kept the K.S. to himself and as such the article for sale did not come out in the open, but the buyer took possession either with the permission of the seller or by force and it was destroyed/lost while in the possession of the "buyer", then latter (buyer)will have to pay a reasonable amount as ransom

/compensation to the seller. Or if the article is meant for exchange with a like thing, then that latter like article lost / damage with the seller, then there is no compensation. The deal becomes null and void.

PROBLEM:- If the K.S. is with the seller, then the price does not in the hands of the purchaser, but it does not go in the possession of the seller.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer has kept the K.S. with himself then the article of sale goes out of the possession of the seller.

PROBLEM:- The article of sale is in the possession of the buyer and it has been damaged, then price shall be paid by the buyer and if the K.S with the seller, then the cost is due on the buyer.

PROBLEM:- Both the seller and the buyer have K.S. with them, then the article will not go out of authority of the seller, nor will the price will not be out of the possession (i.e. property or milkiyat) of the buyer. Then, if the seller makes any use (Tasarruf) of it, then the deal will become void. If the buyer makes any use of the price, then the deal shall become from the buyers's side.

PROBLEM:- Who so ever has the K.S. with him, either seller, the buyer or any third party, when he declares the deal as valid, then it becomes valid for all intents and purposes, whether or not the other person come to know bout it. However if both had the K.S. then declaration by one party will not be taken as the finality of the deal.

PROBLEM:- If the man having K.S. cancels the deal, then there are two possibilities, if he declares cancellation by words of mouth, then the other party should know within the time limit. If the other person does not know at all about it or comes to know after the time limit, then the cancellations is not valid which means that the deal must be finalised.

PROBLEM:- If, one who has the K.S. declares the deal as valid (in order) or cancels his K.S., then no K.S remains operative and the deal will be compulsorily finalised.

PROBLEM:- If the person having the K.S. dies within the time limit, the K.S. becomes null and void. It can not be transferred to his heirs, because there is no inheritance in the K.S.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer has the K.S. then unless the time limit of K.S expires the seller can not demand the cost/price> However if the buyer has given the cash, then the seller will have to hand over the article to the buyer. If the seller has handed over the article, then the buyer will have to hand over the price, but he has the right to annul the deal.

PROBLEM:- When the buyer exercise his authority by using the object of sale in order to its usefulness (on final deal) and the part of test in such that he could also on any other thing which he has no possession, then in that event the K.S. (the power of condition) will not lapse. If his method of testing was not all necessary or this test on any thing not in his possessive right is not permissible then in the latter case his power of condition (K.S) will be invalid, it will lapse.

PROBLEM:- When some definite conditions are made prior to finalising a deal, which are not predictable, then the deals become invalid. For example when buying a she-goat if a definite milk is demanded from her or that it should be pregnant, then this deal will be invalid. However if the buyer demands that it should yield good quality of milk, the deal will be in order.

PROBLEM:- If among some things, the buyer wants one among them, he can select any piece of his choice. This is known as Authority / power of selection, and in Shariat terminology it is called `Khaya'r-e-Ta'een'. For this there are certain condition: (1) The buyer should fix/select any one thing for purchasing and not all the things in the lot. (2) From two or things he may select any one, but not one among four or more things. (3) The buyer should be told to pick up one (thing) which he likes. (4) The time limit for this choice should be maximum three days. (5) This power of fixation or selection should be confined on tare or high priced and not in things the like of which are available.

PROBLEM:- After fixing the price, the question of compensation arises, when the customer takes the thing with intention to purchase and it is damaged en-routes. Other wise not.

PROBLEM:- Suppose a customer takes a piece of cloth from the shopkeeper on condition if it is found suitable but the piece of cloth is lost. In this case no compensation is due, However if he takes the cloth saying if it is found suitable, he would pay Rs.10 as its price. If the said piece of cloth is lost, the customer will have to pay the compensation(because after fixing the price, the thing has become the property of the customer.

Some times it so happens that after purchasing a thing without seeing it, it is found unsuitable. In such a situation Shariat has authorized the buyer to cancel the deal. This is known as KHAYAAR-E-RUYET (K.R). We may call it as the Authority of Inspection.

PROBLEM:- When a thing (packed or invisible from out side) is found unsuitable after inspecting it or not according to standers (mentioned by the seller) the customer has a right to cancel the deal.

PROBLEM:- Even if the customer expresses his intention to purchase it, without seeing or inspecting it and the thing is found unsuitable, he has still the right to cancel the deal, because has not exercised his right of inspection.

PROBLEM:- There is no time limit for K.R. (Khaya'r-e-Ruyet or right of inspection) after which this right can not the exercised, because this authority or right comes in force only on and after inspection of the thing under deal, and this exists unless and until, the customer personally or through some one after having inspecting the thing expresses his willingness or otherwise about it.

PROBLEM:- The K.R. or right of inspection can take place at four places. (1) In the out-right purchase of the things so chosen (2) Through the monopoly or the holder of monopoly (proprietor) (3) In division or distribution and (4) Compromise or on agreed formula for disposal of a particular object/thing. (Note: There is no right of inspection in respect of a thing received by way of compromise in the matter of Qisas (the Law of Retaliation). Similarly, there is no K.R. un respect of bed, liability, or in cash dealings in currencies. However\ever inspection is permissible in respect of articles of gold and silver.)

PROBLEM:- The buyer sells a thing which he has not seen e.g. a thing received in inheritance (Mira's). This deal is correct. But if on seeing the thing he wants to cancel the transaction, this he can not do.

PROBLEM:- In respect of thing which are received through division /distribution, all the possible rights can be exercised, namely, Khaya'r-e-Shart (or K.S.) (right of imposing conditions), Khayare Ruyet (or K.R.)(right of inspection) and Khay'ar-e-Aib (or K.A.) (right of disclosing/discovering defects) we shall deal this last named power/ a right after present the Khaya'r-e-Ruyet.

PROBLEM:- The deal of thing purchased without first having seen it can he canceled, because this deal was not binding on the buyer.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer takes possession of a thing (of sale), and expressed his willingness to retain it, or some defect takes place afterwards or he handles the things resulting some defect which can not be removed, in all these conditions the right of inspection (K.R.) can not be revoked, it has lapsed. He can not cancel the deal.

PROBLEM:- IF the deal of a thing which the holder has taken in his possession sells it to another person who returns it after having seen defect in it, or takes it back after having kept it as pawn or breaks the monopoly, then the changes taking place on account of different handling aspect on it, the power of inspection has already lapsed can no be revived.

PROBLEM:- If some part of the article of sale is damaged, though it may be serious nature or a slight one, the right of inspection (K.R.) becomes is lost.

PROBLEM:- Unless and until the buyer suspends or withdraws the right of inspection, the seller can not demand the price.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer dies after making purchase, his heirs shall not have the K.R.(Khyar-e-ruyet) or the right of inspection which means they do not have the right to cancel the deal.

PROBLEM:- If some change takes place in the article after the deal has been finalised, the buyer retains the right of inspection. But if the condition is the same as it was at the time of purchased then the K.R. (right of inspection) does not exist. How if at the time of agreement it was not known to the buyer that the thing he is buying is the same which is with him now, the-right of inspection will be available to the buyer.

PROBLEM:- The seller says that the thing which had sold is the same and no change has taken place in it, while the buyer says that the change has occurred, then the buyer will have to prove his stand by producing witnesses. IF the buyer does not produce witnesses, then the state of the seller, on oath, will be accepted.

PROBLEM:- In the cancellation of deal on the basis of exercise of the right of inspection (Khay'ar-e-Ruyet) the decision of the Qazi is required nor the willingness of the seller.

PROBLEM:- When the deal is rejected by the buyer on account of K.R. (khay'ar-e-Ruyet), the seller should be informed of this, otherwise he will be under the impression that the deal has been finalised. This will now necessitate finding another customer. In the absence of the required knowledge, he will not search a new customer and might suffer loss in the end.

PROBLEM:- Inspection/examination of the object of deal does not mean that it should be seen in full and no part should not be left unseen. The Ruyet (looking into) inspection means that the essential part should be seen, for example in respect of the things which are given in measurement or by weighing only a sample thereof should be enough. However in respect of things which are packed or stuffed in bags, the buyer has a right to revise the deal if he finds some defects in quantity/quality on examining the packed contents.

PROBLEM:- The buyer says that the things is not like that which he had seen and the seller says that the thing is the same which he had sold. In this state of dispute the opinion/decision of learned honest men should be accepted and abided by.

PROBLEM:- A man purchases a thing without seeing it and deputes another man as his attorney who sees the thing and accepts it. In the circumstances the deal becomes final and if he disapproves it, then the deal can be cancelled.

PROBLEM:- The buyer sends some one as his emissary to the seller to see the thing and take its possession. In this case the seeing

/observing the thing by the emissary is not enough, the buyer has still the right to cancel the deal if he so desire on seeing the thing himself. If the emissary/vakil had seen the object of sale before being appointed as such. Now if the vakil approves the thing, the right of acceptance goes to him and he can finalise the deal.

PROBLEM:- The sale and purchase by blind man is both valid. If he sells something, he will not the right to cancel the deal, however, he will have this right if he buys something. He can examine the thing by touching its sides. IF he accepts it, then his right of rejection lapses. Similarly things which need tasting and smelling the deal will become final if he approves by lasting or smelling. A blind buyer can also depute some one on his behalf, in that case the right of acceptance is transferred to him and his decision will have to be accepted.

PROBLEM:- If the deal takes place by exchange of one with another (of different nature, for examples book and cloth) then both will have the right of deal as both of them are seller and buyer at the same time.

This part deals with aspects of transaction of things in which some defects are detected after the matter has been decided and the thing concerned passes on to the buyer as new owner. The presence of defect in the object of sale has its effect on the price and utility of the thing. Here some aspects are mentioned in the light of Laws of Shariat in this behalf.

If the thing is sold without pointing out the defect, then the buyer has a return the thing to the seller when the defect comes to his knowledge. This exercise of right is known as Khay'ar-e-Ai'b (Aib in Arabic is meant defect, flaw, fault etc).

For the exercise of this right it is not necessary that the defect should be indicated at the time of deal (transaction). In any case the buyer has a right to return the thing, when he notices the . If he retains the thing full price will have to be paid (or the thing should be returned). It is not permissible that the buyer should insist to retain the thing on reduced price.

PROBLEM:- The defect should be such that in the market the price will be less (than originally demanded).

PROBLEM:- To hide the defect in the thing is har'am and a major sin. It should be mode known before its deal to any customer.

PROBLEM:- On the basis of Khay'ar-e-Aib (we shall refer it as K.A. for short) the buyer becomes the owner of the thing, but right of possession does not becomes his legal right (as the issue of defect remains unresolved) and the right of inheritance is attached to it. This means that if the buyer dies without knowing the defect, but the same (defect) is detected by his inheritors, then on the basis of K.A. (khya'r-e-Aib) the inheritors have the right to cancel the deal.

There is not time limit for exercising K.A. So long as other circumstances which prevent its return, are brought to light the right to cancel the deal remains with the inheritors of the deceased.

PROBLEM:- The prospective buyer comes to know about the defect in advance. As such he can cancel the deal without recourse to litigation. However if he has taken possession of the thing, then the deal can not be called off without the consent of the seller or under the orders of (Qazis) court.

PROBLEM:- For the exercise of right, under K.A. the following conditions should be fulfilled.

(1) The defect in the object of sale was there at the time of transaction or it was detected before the buyer look its possession. It means that if the defect after its possession by the buyer, no right of cancelling the deal can not be exercise.

(2) If the buyer takes possession with the defect in the thing, the same (defect) should remain. If the defect disappears (for any reasons) the right under K.A. lapses.

(3) The buyer should be unaware of the defect before striking the deal or at the time of taking possession (because if he buys or takes possession with due knowledge of its defect, no right under K.A. can be claimed).

(4) The sells has not absolved himself of the responsibility of the defect, because if he owns it, the buyer can not claim recompense under K.A.

(Note: The problems; relating to defects or otherwise in the habits of pet animals, birds etc ahve been left over, because they are of trivial nature and do not come for consideration under the Laws of Shariat - Translator)

PROBLEM:- The house which is generally regarded as haunted or carry ill-omen can be returned, because this becomes a known defect and the people normally do not like to purchase such a house. It is a matter of disbelief and not an inherent natural defect, but it becomes a "defect" from transaction point of view.

PROBLEM:- The basket of fruits if found stuffed with dry grass etc at the bottom, generally not seen, can be returned. The deal has a (moral) defect.

PROBLEM:- The Holy Quran or any book with misprints, or dim impressions can be returned.

PROBLEM:- IF after knowing the defect the buyer makes any kind of the thing as a matter of right of possession, then the right of cancellation on account of defect will not be permissible.

PROBLEM:- If a amn buys a goat or cow and it milk is used when the defect in the animal comes to knowledge, he can not return the animal. However he can claim damage. Similarly if the buyer milks the naimal knowing the defect in the animal. He can not return the animal because milking the animal knowing the defect amounts to willingness to retain it.

PROBLEM:- The man purchases piece of cloth for his minor child and it is cut to size, when defect in the cloth comes to notice. He can neither return the cloth nor demand payment of loss. However if the cloth is meant for the adult child, then he can demand payment of loss/damage.

PROBLEM:- If some new defect comes up in the article of sale when it is in the possession of the buyer, then whether the defect was on account of usage by the buyer of some natural calamity he can not return the article, however he can get the damage. And if the defect was produced by the seller, even then he can not return the thing, but he can receive payment for both the defects.

PROBLEM:- If the thing is such that on account of defect it is to be return (to the seller) but there is cost involved in its return, in this case the cost etc will have to be paid by the buyer.

PROBLEM:- If the object of sale is subjected to additional treatment, for example, if unstitched cloth is sewn, an uncultivated land is planted, or the object itself is lost destroyed, in all these cases, only the claim for damage is permissible, but not return, even both the seller and the buyer agree on its return. The Qazi too can not enforce its return by a decree.

PROBLEM:- An egg if it is found dirty filthy on breaking, it will not be returned, but it will be replaced or get the money back, because a rotten egg is of no use. This also applies to fruits, vegetables etc. Which are thrown away when they are of no use.

PROBLEM:- The buyer brings back the naimal as it is wounded (and he can not keep it), the seller says the wound is another one, the earlier wound has been cured and healed. In this case the statement of the buyer shall be accepted.

PROBLEM:- While offering for sale any thing the seller declares himself not responsible for any defect, the sale will be in order and if the buyer accepts the thing he can not return it or claim any damage for its defect if it is noticed afterwards.

PROBLEM:- if the seller warns the buyer to accept and buy a thing at his own risk for any fault, existing in it or noticed later on, the buyer on purchasing the thing, can not claim any damage or return it except with the consent of the seller and on terms specified by him.

PROBLEM:- The buyer wants to return a thing, but the seller suggests to accept some amount and retain the thing. The buyer accepts. This compromiseable is permissible. On the other hand if the seller refuses to take back the thing and demands some money for the deal or the buyer himself offers money to the seller for accepting back his own article. Any compromise thus reached will be invalid and the amount so offered and bribe and interest which is haram.

PROBLEM:- In order to know the difference between the prices of a thing when it free from damage or defect and when the damage has occurred, the expert opinion will be required to settle the issue. The difference between the prices can be claimed by the buyer from the seller.

PROBLEM:- A man purchases a a piece of land and makes it as a masjid. If some defect in the land is detected, it can not be returned. However damage so occurred can be claimed. Similar is the command in respect of the land made `Waqf'. Here too the damage if any noticed in the land can be claimed, but the land will not be returned.

PROBLEM:- A thing has been purchased with excessive fraud (Ghaban-e-Fa'hish) involved in it. It may have been done in either, the thing can be returned. If however the fraud is of a minor nature (known as Ghaban-e-Yaseer), the thing can not be returned. There are three kinds of fraud, (1) some time the seller deceives the buyer (2) sometime the buyer deceives the seller, while (3) the broker or agent deceives both or any one of the buyer or the seller.

In any three cases it the fraud is of excessive nature `Ghaban-e-Fa'hish' (beyond the scope of bearing), he can return the thing. If the fraud has been committed by a stranger, the thing can not be returned.

PROBLEM:- When a thing is purchased with Ghaban-e-fa'hish, but the fact of fraud is noticed after sometime of its use by the buyer, he can return the thing after discount of the usage and get back the balance of the price paid by him.

The Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has said, `Surely Allah forbidden (as haram) the Wine and its price (deal, selling and buying), the dead (corpse) and it price, and the hog (swine) and its price' (Ibn Majah). It is reported in Bukhari and Muslim that the Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has forbidden the deal in the fruits unless they are fit for use, he has forbidden both the seller and the buyer. There is Hadees in the Saheeh Muslim forbidding the sale of date palms unless they become red or yellow (on ripening), the sale of the grain while still in the plant, unless the ear of corn becomes white and there is peace after some natural calamity. It is reported in the Saheeh Muslim that the Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) `If you sell fruits (on the trees) and some calamity occurs, then it is not permissible for you to take any thing from it, it will be an unlawful grabbing from your brother without payment in return. Tirmizi has reported from Hakeem bin Hazam saying the Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has forbidden me from selling a thing which is not with me. It is also reported in The Tirmizi when a companion came to the Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) and said, "O Prophet of Allah, comes to me to purchase a thing which is not with me, I settle the deal, I go to bazaar, purchase the thing and give it to the customer. He said not to do dealing in a thing which is not with you (as possession).

The Holy Prophet (Allah's peace and grace be upon him) has forbidden two deals in one deal, meaning thereby that the cost of a thing if purchased in cash it is so much and if on credit the cost will a little higher, or in other case when a man sells a thing on a certain price and he tells the buyer to his thing on a certain price.

The Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has said, `Loan transaction (Qarz-o-Bai'e) is not Halal (which stipulated a deal in such a way that the seller asks the buyer that he (seller) is selling his thing at such a price on the condition that the latter (buyer) would give him a loan. Another situation in this behalf (two dealings in one deal) is that a man gives another man a loan and sells his own thing at the hand of loan taker at a higher cost. And in the transaction, two conditions are not halal (permissible), and the profit on a thing is not a halal which does not carry guarantee and the selling of a thing is not permissible which is not one's property (with rights of possession). (Tirmizi) Nisai and Abdu Dawood.PROBLEM:-In a situation where a rightful participant in the deal is absent or the thing itself is haram or impermissible for deal, under the laws of shariat. The example where the right participant is not present is that either a minor child or a lunatic settles a deal which is not acceptable from the Shariat's point of view. As for the (permissible) thing being absent, it is in respect of dead body (corpse, a carrion), wine or a Hurr tree person (not a slave) whose sale is not permissible, or the situation where the person or the place itself is not conducive to a permissible sale.

PROBLEM:-The article means for sale or its cost, if any of these does not ahve religious sanction, it dealing is impermissible, for example the dead corpse (carrion) blood or the Free (man or woman, not a slave) their deal is haram in any heavenly religion. If any of these is worthy of deal in some religion while prohibited in any religion, if they are taken as article of transaction then the deal will be invalid or if is taken as a cost or price then the deal will be totally wrong (Fa'sid) for example, the wine which is haram in Islam, while in christianly it was taken as a commodity. It therefore in any deal the wine is regarded as a commodity to be used in exchange of another commodity then the deal / transaction will be impermissible or Haram.

PROBLEM:-Asset (in Urdu m'al) is a thing to which human inclination is attracted, which is exchanged in business transaction and others are prevented to grab or extent it, which is accumulated for use in time of future needs. There fore a lump of clay which is stationary at a place, it will not be an asset and it transaction will be invalid, however when it is transferred to another, it will taken as an assets or commodity and a business of it will be valid.

PROBLEM:-By dead body corpse, carrion (in Urdu, Mur'dar) is meant that animal which is not slaughtered, whether the animal naturally, or some one strangulated it or some other animal killed it. However Fish and Locust are not included in `murdar' because no slaughtering is possible with them.

PROBLEM:-There is no deal in any thing which does not exist, For example in a two storied building under possession of two different persons on each floor. If purchaser the upper portion collapses while other structures remain. Now, if the owner of the upper floor wants to dispose of his portion, he can not do so, the upper portion is now non-existent. If his intention is sell the occupancy or building right, this is also not permissible because the deal/transaction of a thing/article which physically exists. However the upper house exists (in any shape or condition) a deal of it will be valid.

PROBLEM:-Water lying in the well or canal can not be sold out. However when it is filled in pot or pitcher, it becomes the property of the holder. It can be sold as a commodity.

PROBLEM:-By collecting the rain water, a person becomes its owner. he can have a deal with it. The water collected in the yucca reservoir can sold, if fresh water in not forthcoming in to.

PROBLEM:-In a stock of things meant for sale some part is present and some part is not seen, like the flower beds, in such a case the sale is not valid. IF however the whole stock of flowers/beds are sold, then the deal is valid.

PROBLEM:-The principal point in a deal is that the thing meant for sale should belong to the specified category, any variation in quality or category of things will render the deal as impermissible. This is particularly applicable to the deal of bet animals or precious stones and gems. In such case the buyer is authorized to accept or reject the deal.

PROBLEM:-An article of `WAQF' when mixed with another article of NON-WAQF' brand for a business deal, the deal of the NON WAQF article is right and of the WAQF will be in valid. If MASJID in combination with any other article of any nature, the deal of both the categories will be wrong.

PROBLEM:-Two men sharing a house as owner-partner if one of them sells the entire house to the other, then the deal of his share is valid and the price of that share will be given to him but not of the entire house.

PROBLEM:-Two men are sharing a house or a piece of land. If one of them sells a part of the land, its deal will be invalid. However if he sells his own share of land, then the deal will be lawful.

PROBLEM:-IF the entire village having Masjid and graveyard is sold out, then the deal with the exception of the masjid and the graveyard will be lawful, whether or not the mention of these two places has mentioned in the deal. Even otherwise these religious structures/places are exempt from sale as a rule. (The management of these places can however be changed after the deal is over - Translator).

PROBLEM:-The business deal of human hair is not permissible and to make use of these hairs in others ways is not allowed, for example to make plaif of human hair which the women put on their head is "haram".

PROBLEM:-The Holy Hair (Moo-e-Mubarak) of the Holy Prophet (May Allah's grace and peace upon him), in possession of any person can be gifted to another person in exchange of another gift (not by way of sale) is permissible. To receive blessings from the Moo-e-Mubarak to drink and apply the washed water of the Moo-e-Mubarak on the eye-lids is recommended in the Ahadees of the Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him).

PROBLEM:-The invalid deal (known in Shariat as Bai-e-Baitl) does not imply the possession of the article of sale by the buyer if he gets it by way of purchase (which is declared unlawful-batil). So long as he remains in possession, it will be as a trust (amanat).

PROBLEM:-To include conditions in the agreement of deal as a matter of necessity is not harmful (for example, imposing conditions on the seller to arrange possession to the buyer of the article of purchase or the condition asking the buyer to arrange personal guarantee of the payment of the price of the article of purchase or of placing some like prices article as a pledge (pawn) to ensure payment, provided the person who is appointed guarantor (Zamin) is present in the same sitting time. In these circumstances, these extra precaution are permissible. However if he guarantor (Zamin)refuse to act as such then the deal will become faulty (Fasid). If the buyer refuse to agree by these assurances the seller has the right to cancel the deal. Similarly the buyer can ask the seller to make so and so as the guarantor who will facilitate possession of the article or if any right accrues from the article, the guarantor will get it accepted and paid by the seller. This is also permissible. The guarantee as declared by the owners/manufactures of the articles of sale which procedure is becoming popular in the modern business deal is also valid. However all such conditions of guarantee which are not valid from the shariat point of view (however attractive) will make the deal as totally invalid and unlawful.

PROBLEM:-The conditions of the following natures imposed while transacting a deal are unlawful, namely,

The servant sold will serve the seller for one month.

The seller of the house will stay for one month.

The buyer will give so much amount as loan or give so and so

thing as a present.

The seller will keep the sold article will not vacate possession for one month.

In all these above mentioned conditions the business transactions will not be lawful.

PROBLEM:-There is no mention of the price in the business deal, but it is said that the price current in the market will also be its price. This is not permissible or, if it is said that there is no price (as a deal) this is also not valid, because there can be no deal without the price.

PROBLEM:-The sale is cash of he fish which is still in the pond or the river is not valid as these are in the possession (milkiyat) of the seller. Or the same (fish) in this condition (not yet caught) if sold in exchange of articles other than cash, this is also not valid, because (in both these cases) the possession is not acceptable.

PROBLEM:-The sale of fish caught from the river and put in a ditch from where it can be caught without any help or thing, is valid, because its possession it recognizable. If however foreign object is necessary to remove the fish from the ditch, then its deal will be valid only when its possession is given to the prospective buyer. If the fish comes of its own in the ditch which was prepared for this purpose, then the fish will become the man's property, others can not take/claim it. If the ditch was not dug for this purpose, then the fish falling in it will not that man's property. However, if he closes the outlet of a ditch in which fish have floated from the nearby pond, he becomes the owner of the fishes that are blocked in the pond. The deal is this fishes will be permissible. Similarly if some fleeing quadruped like deer, slag fall in the ditch dug for any purpose the animal becomes the possession of ditch digger others can not claim it. However the ditch was not dug by any one, then the animal falling in it becomes the property of anyone who can by hand on it, suppose a string net is spread in the open for drying it and some bird gets caught while flying near. Then if the net was spread for the purpose of catching the birds, the birds caught in it belong the net owner. Otherwise laying hand on them can carry them home. If the birds caught in the net escape in the open, then any one catching them will own them. Similar is the command in respect of hunts to made by hunting dogs and hawks.

PROBLEM:-If a stray bird lays egg/young one after self hatching they will be owned by the man who has make this place for this very purpose. Otherwise any one how finds them would be deemed the owner.

PROBLEM:-If some animal of hunt by chance comes into the house and the man inside shuts the does, then it becomes his. No other person can take it.

PROBLEM:-To give ponds lakes etc on contract for catching fish (hunting) is not permissible.

PROBLEM:-Fish caught in the net and sold out as a routine. The fisher catcher can not claim any pearl recovered from inside any fish nor can he claim as a separate article of sale. Such a claim and the sale there of are both unlawful.

PROBLEM:-The agricultural farm in which the crop is not ruipe the deal there of is of three kinds namely, (1) the buyer will cut the crop forthwith, (2) he will have it grazed by his animal (3) he takes it on the condition that till its ripeness he will leave the field as it is . In the first two cases, the deal (purchase) by the buyer is permissible, while in the third case, since it is profitable for the buyer, the deal will be irregular.

PROBLEM:-To sell the fruits ( on the trees) before they are even visible now means an irregular and faulty deal. However if the fruits have appeared (on branches) although they are not yet of use, the deal will be permissible, but the buyer must pluck them forthwith. If the condition has been settles that so low as the fruits become ripe, they will remain on the trees, then this deal is faulty (Fasid). OR if the purchase has been made without any condition or if the seller has agreed to allow the fruits on the tree till they are ripe then the deal will be in order.

PROBLEM:-If cow, goat or hen have been let out to another man on the condition that he will feed and nourish them and their young one's and chickens will be divided half and half between them, such a deal is not in order. The young ones and chickens belong to the owner of the animals and the other man will get the cost of feeding and care taking the animals at the rates that are extant at the moment.

Similarly if a man offers his land to plant trees on the condition that after a stipulated time, they will divide the trees and fruits equally between them. This is also irregular. The trees and fruits on them belong to the owner and the other man will get the price of the trees at the rates, which were current when the tress were planted, he will also get the wages of the labour which he rendered in this connection

PROBLEM:-The sale of the skin of a carrion (murdar) in unlawful when it is not tanned. And if it is tanned, its use and sale is permissible.

PROBLEM:-The sale of unclean (napak) edible oil is permissible and it can also be used for other purposes except cooking and eating. But it is necessary that the buyer should be informed of the oil being impure and unclean, so that he may use it for cooking. Even otherwise impurity is a blemish or fault of which one should be informed. Unclean and unholy oil can not be used in oil lamps in Masjid, but it can be used at home.

PROBLEM:-The fat of a carrion is prohibited for sale and derive any benefit (money) in any way from it.

PROBLEM:-The tendon, hairs, bones, quill, beaks, hooves and nails of a dead body can be sold as well as made use of. Similarly the ivory and bones of an elephant can be sold and made use of for any purpose e.g. decoration pieces, bracelets etc.

PROBLEM:-Iron and brass finger rings which are forbidden to men and woman are also forbidden for sale. Their sale is makrooh (undesirable). Similarly the opium is also forbidden for use and sale especially at the hands of those who are addicted to it, because it amounts to encouraging them in their notorious habit.

PROBLEM:-The thing of which deal has been settled but the full price has not been received can not be purchased at a lesser price from the buyer, even if the market rate of it has dropped.

PROBLEM:-A man purchases a thing but he has not yet taken it possession. If he proposes to sell this thing along with another thing which is his own, the deal will be valid in respect of the thing of which he is the owner.

PROBLEM:-A man offers his portion of the house for sale to another man, but the seller is not aware of the portion of the house offered for sale, while the buyer knows, the deal in this case is valid. In case buyer does not know what portion is under deal then the deal will not be in order even if the seller knows.

PROBLEM:-After entering in deal of a thing with a man to sell it to another person is haram and extremely false, If the first deal is cancelled, even then the second deal will not be in order. However, if the first buyer has taken possession of the thing, then for the second deal his consent and permission is necessary.

PROBLEM:-The deal in which the quality of the thing and its exact price are not clear, is not valid, especially when there is a possibility of confusion and dispute afterwards. However if the deal is clear and mutually agreed, then there is no harm in finalising it.

PROBLEM:-The command in respect of an invalid deal is that if the buyer takes possession of the thing with the permission of the seller, then he becomes the owner of thing, but so long as he does not possess the thing he will not be regarded as the owner. The permission of the seller may be distinct case the possession and ownership is valid.

PROBLEM:-In a faulty and irregular deal (Bai-e-Fasid) it is incumbent on the buyer not to take the thing in his possession. It is also necessary for the seller to check the buyer to do so. To cancel the irregular deal is the duty of every one concerned with the deal. If the possession has already been made, it is the moral duty of the buyer to cancel the deal and return thing. If such as situation has arisen where the thing concerned has been lost and damaged to an unrepairable condition, then the like of in utility or in price thing must be replaced. I f the issue of returning the price comes up for settlement, then the price of the thing on the day of deal will have to be paid.

PROBLEM:-To carry out the deal under compulsion or unlawful mean amounts to faulty deal and it must be declared invalid. But the cancellation of the deal is not incumbent on the man who has been compelled to undertake the deal. But it is binding on the man who has used compelling tactics.

PROBLEM:-In an irregular and faulty deal if the buyer takes possession of the thing without permission of the seller, then it will neither a valid possession nor ownership nor any usage of the thing.

PROBLEM:-In an irregular deal, the buyer sold the some thing with another man or gifted to some one as a gift or did any thing which prevented the return or come back in possession of the buyer (original one who bought the thing in the first instance) the whole process (which deprived the real buyer to regain possession of the thing in the deal) made the deal as faulty and it can not be cancelled or withdrawn..

PROBLEM:-If the deal was done under compulsion or unwillingness of the buyer and after gaining possession, makes some kind of usage with the thing, then every thing done with the thing will be taken as invalid and the seller still has the right to cancel the deal.

PROBLEM:-The deal can be cancelled even if the thing is given on hire to some one.

PROBLEM:-IF any one of the buyer of the seller dies, his heir has the right to cancel the deal as the successor to the deceased and using the latter's right in his behalf.

PROBLEM:-If the irregular deal is cancelled, then the seller can not take the thing back unless he returns the money, either the some money which he received or its equivalent.

PROBLEM:-If the land id purchased through the irregular or faulty deal and the buyer plants trees on it or builds a house there on, in this situation the deal can not be cancelled and the buyer will have to pay the price of the land.

PROBLEM:-A legator (i.e. the person from whom an inheritance is derived, in Urdu `Muris') had received the property etc. through unlawful (haram) means, and now the some has come in the possession of the rightful heir (waris). If he comes to know that the property belongs to so and so person, then it is moral responsibility to hand over the property to that person. If he does not know who the real owner is, then he should give it away as a charity on behalf of the (unknown) owner.

PROBLEM:-It is not necessary for the buyer to enquire from the seller that the thing under deal is halal or haram. However if the seller has a bad reputation in his dealing, then it is necessary to check. If the thing is halal, he should finalise the deal, otherwise he should abstain from it.

PROBLEM:-After purchasing a house and settling the deal if some money or any other costly thing such as jewelry or ornaments are discovered then the same should be returned to the seller, as it is demand of moral and hones dealing.

The word `makrooh' literally means thing which is detestable or undesirable or that which arouses aversion. According to laws of Shariat any deal or transaction which evokes aversion is forbidden and one who carries out such a seal commits sin. This deal is purely sentimental depending upon the moral or religious reaction. Legally such a deal is not invalid and as such it can not be a part of agreement declaring it unlawful. There at the lower level it is below faulty or irregular (Fasid). Some scholars of Islamic Jurisprudence (Fuqaha) are of the view that a `makrooh deal' should also cancelled like a faulty (Fasid) deal. The difference between `Fasid' and `Makrooh' deal is that in the case of former (Fasid) if the partners in the deal do not cancelled it (Faskh), the Qazi can decree for its annulment and in the latter (Makrooh) deal the Qazi can only emphasis the moral decorum for its cancellation, but he will not declare it as null and void in the legal sense.a

PROBLEM:- Withholding or hoarding food grains with evil intentions to sell it at higher and exorbitant rates in the days of scarcity due to drought or floods, cyclones etc (In Shariat Terminology known as Ehtikar) is forbidden and an act of severe divine displeasure and*wrath.

PROBLEM:- To store and hoard grain produce of one's own land is not hoarding in the penal sense nor it is forbidden. However if the intention behind hoarding is profiteering and earning immoral riches, then this very hoarding becomes curse. If the hoarders are intentions and activities become known and the people are in dire need of food grains facing near, famine conditions, then in such a situation the Qazi can force the hoarder (s) to release the food grains for the people or suffer hard penal punishment in default.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

*: According to Hadees Sharif, the ho-ardor of grains, with evil intentions to sell it higher rates has been condemned as one on whom curse of Allah befalls. The Holy Prophet (Allah's grace and peace be upon him) has said that the hoarder shall be afflicted with abdominal deceases such as leprosy, extreme poverty. The angels and the righteous servants send curses on the hoarders.

Ehtikar (hoarding) can also be in eatables, such as dry fruits as wells as the grass and fader which are the food meant for the cattle and other pet animals. Fixing of high rates is not the prerogative of selfish man. Allah the Almighty cause abundant growth of food grains which means the prices of these commodities

must be within the reach of every needy person. High prices do not enable the poor people to purchase them.

PROBLEM:- Fixing of prices as legally binding by the government

agencies is not correct. The government or its functionaries can however advise to the dealer in food grains to adopt a reasonable standard of food prices, especially in circumstance when the deals / land lords have fixed exhortitave prices of food grains, which are beyond the reach of common man.

This is a intricate kind of business behaviour when some one not directly involved in the transaction happens to possess powers to interfere in the object of transaction in the rights of another person without the permission of the latter. Such a person is nicknamed as FUZ'LEE in the business deal. The strange fact is that this kind of self indulgence becomes regularized at the instance of the person who can declare it as in order (Jaiz). For the sake of common understanding we shall call the self indulging person as FUZ'ULEE and the person who declares/permits in indulgence (Tasarruf) as in order MUJAIYIZ (one who declares as Jaiz) correct, in order. Problems narrated under the above caption are limited in number and complexity. There fore these un-usual terminologies will not cause undue embarrassment.

PROBLEM:- The interference committed by the FUZULI shall become in order if the MUJAIYIZ (the man who can declare FUZULI'S action as correct) declares it as such. But the presence of the MUJAIYIZ is necessary at the time of transaction/deal. If the MUJAIYIZ is not present then the transaction can not be said to have taken place, and as such there is no role for the FUZULEE.

PROBLEM:- To declare the deal of FUZULI as correct it is essential that the object is present on the spot. Otherwise no regularization can take place. It is also necessary that both the partners of the deal namely the seller and the buyer should be on their stand (terms of transaction). If both of them cancel their own deal or if any one of them dies, then the deal not be regularized (through an act of FUZULI).

PROBLEM:- IF the owner okays the deal of the FUZULI, then the price which the FUZULI has received becomes the property of the owner and the money in the hands of the FUZULI becomes as a trust (Amanat) and the FUZULI himself become the vakil.

PROBLEM:- The FUZULI has also the right to cancel the deal which the owner has not so far declare as in order. IF the FUZULI has arranged a marriage deal (Nikah), then he can not annul it.

PROBLEM:- The FUZULI strikes a deal and the Malik or Mujaiyiz dies before okaying, then his inheritors can not okay it. Immediately on the death of the owner the deal no longer remains in vogue.

PROBLEM:- The usurper after taking possession of some property sells it out, but later on pays the ransom or compensation for his unlawful possession. The deal in this manner is in order.

PROBLEM:- If the owner of a goods rebukes the usurper for having unlawful taken away his property. But he condones the unlawful possession and tells the unlawful possessor to sell the thing and give the price to the buyer as a gift. This is permissible whatever the words may have been used for condoning (which amounts to willingness or acceptance) or otherwise of the action of the Unlawful behaviour of an unauthorized person. (Here the usurper may be taken as a FUZULI under the above caption).

PROBLEM:- The FUZULI carries out the deal in the presence of the owner, but the owner says nothing and keeps silence, he also does not reject the deal. This silence does not amount to acceptance of the deal.

PROBLEM:- The thing which has been pledged (kept as pawn) or given on hire, its deal depends upon the permission of the man with whom the thing is pledged or given on hire. If they agree then the deal will be in order. But neither the pledge holder nor the man taking on hire has the right to cancel or reject the deal, not ever the man who kept thing on pledge nor the hirer (taking on hire) can reject the deal (because they don't possession the right of ownership). However the buyer can declare the deal as void subject to approval of the pledge keeper on\r the hire dealer. Suppose then two men had previously cancelled the deal, they the approved it. In that case the deal will be right.

If the intervening conditions of pledging and giving on hire are withdrawn after finalizing the deal, then the original deal will come in force (which has come into picture after the release of hire/pledge). If the hire dealer okays the deal and it becomes valid, even the thing in the dealing can not be taken from the hire dealer unless his dues are paid to him.

PROBLEM:- If the thing which is on hire is given away as in deal to the hirer (on who takes things on hire), if (the deal) becomes effective at once, it does not require the permission of the owner.

PROBLEM:- When a thing lent on hire is sold out and the buyer knows that the thing he has purchased is on hire. He now agrees that till such as the term of hire lasts, the thing should remain with the man, and after the terms comes to an end it should be given in his (owner's) possession. In such a situation he can not demand the return of the thing unless the time for handing over possession comes.

PROBLEM:- A field is let out to a farmer on contract for a fixed time limit. Whether the farmer cultivates the field or not, its deal depends on the willingness of the farmer.

PROBLEM:- A house is let on rent, but the landlord wants to have a deal for the house which the tenant does not agree. To get rid of this situation the land lord enhances the rent and enters in to another contract deal of tenancy. New agreement becomes effective and the old deal lapses.

PROBLEM:- The tenant or lessee comes to know the owner of the thing under deal has sold out to another person. The tenant request the buyer that since he has bought the thing while his agreement or lease is still current, he requests the buyer to allow him to stay till the recovery of rent paid by him is return to him. The new buyer agrees and the deal in question becomes operative.

PROBLEM:- The process of withdrawing or cancelling any agreement or deal is known as IQALAH (we shall use this terminology in enunciation "problem" under this caption). It may take place on personal move or on suggestion of others. It may include the return (pay back) of the price of thing sold or accept the some on behalf of others, IQALAH is not permissible in respect of Nikah, Talaq (divorce), Utaq (freeing slave or slave girl) and `Ibra' (absolving one self from any responsibility). If in any agreement between two persons, one desires Iqalah, the other should respond agreeably. This is an act of virtue worthy of Divine reward.

PROBLEM:- In `Iqalah' the consent of the other partner is essential. Along a person can not do it. It is also necessary that the Iqalah should take place in the sitting where both the persons are present. The absence of one or his not hearing the terms of Iqalah will not fulfill the demands of Iqalah. (The details of reasons against the legality of Iqalah mentioned in this `problem' are purely hypothetical.)

PROBLEM:- The conditions for the IQALAH are as under,

(1) Both the person of agreement or deal should be willing.

(2) The Iqalah should take place in one and the same sitting.

(3) If Iqalah is in respect of a serviceable object (Bai-e-Sarf) then in the same thing the possession of the two exchangeable things should also be arrange.

(4) The thing/object of sale should be present. The constancy of the price is not the essential condition.

(5) The thing/object of sale should be of such nature the deal of which can be rejected on the pleas enunciated under terms of rights known as Khyar-e-Shart, Khar-e-Ruyet and Khar-e-Aib (we have dealt with these Powers/Rights in details in the forgoing pages under these very specific captions).

(6) If interference of grave nature has taken place with the object on account of which the deal can not be rejected, Iqalah is also not possible and permissible.

(7) The seller should not have gifted the object before its possession by the buyer.

PROBLEM:- The thing (of deal) was present and intact at the time of Iqalah but before it could be returned it was destroyed/damaged beyond recognition the Iqalah to becomes obsolete.

PROBLEM:- `Iqalah' is permissible on the amount which is the price of the thing in question. The Iqalah on an amount more or less than the sale price of the thing will not be acceptable. It may be exact amount in the same currency or its equivalence in any currency as a legal tender.

PROBLEM:- On account of some defect after the sale the Iqalah is done on a lessor amount than the sale price, this is permissible. If however, the defect in removed later, then the buyer can take the amount from the seller which he got less on account of the defect in the thing in the first stage of Iqalah.

PROBLEM:- The soap was sold in fresh condition, but the Iqalah was done when the soap became dry. The buyer will have to give the same (dried) soap, on Iqalah.

PROBLEM:- Iqalah means the cancellation of the original deed between the original seller and buyer, but this Iqalah is the fresh deal for the other person. It means that if on account of the Iqalah the original deal can not be treated as cancelled, then the iqalah itself becomes false and inoperative. For example if after the deal of a slave girl (which not in vogue at the present time) or a pet animal, if a young one is born, then the Iqalah of the slave girl or the animal can not he done.

PROBLEM:- IF a part of the object of deal is destroyed while the remaining part is in contact, then the Iqalah of the remaining part can be done.

PROBLEM:- If the seller receive excess amount from the buyer and if the buyer desires to do Iqalah of the thing, there should be hitch in doing the Iqalah. (The excess amount received by the buyer is reasonable limit as a profit etc) then there is no need for the Iqalah. The buyer can straight away, cancel the deal.

PROBLEM:- IF a thing is given as a (free) gift to some one (in token of love, respect, affection etc) but the man receiving the gift sells as an object of deal, now the man presenting the gift can not get it back.

PROBLEM:- Just as the Iqalah of an object of deal can be done, in the same way the Iqalah of the (first) Iqalah can also be done. The Iqalah of the Iqalah cancels the first Iqalah which means the return of original deal (of sale). However if in `Bai-e-Salam (we shall deal with this later) the object of deal has not changed hands and its Iqalah has taken place then the Iqalah of this Iqalah is not permissible.

These are purely Arabic terms of sale with or without gain (profit) respectively in the deal.

PROBLEM:- A thing bought a thing on certain price and offered for re-sale in the market. While fixing the price some time, the additional expenditures incurred on it are also added along with the intended profit or gain. This type of resale is termed as `MURABAHA' or sale with profit or simply SWP.

In the other event where no profit in intended on sale in known as `TAULIYAH' or sale with no profit or simply SWNP.

(Note: By the translator, since no recognized or accepted terminologies are available, an attempt has been make to simplify; the process of deal by assuming self-coned abbreviations. These can be and will be replaced by correct terminologies or their abbreviations).

The thing which comes in possession otherwise than by sale deal, for example, through gift or inheritance or by the execution of Will (wasiyat) can also be disposed by either of he two channels namely SWP (sale with profit) or SWNP (sale with no profit).

PROBLEM:- Murabaha (SWP) is not permissible in the rupee or Ashrafi (recognized currencies).

(Note: The exchange rates of foreign curries are notified by the government of the day. This different from "selling" currencies at one's desire).

PROBLEM:- The basic condition for the Murbaha (SWP) and Tauliyah (SWNP) is that the thing which the first buyer has bought should be such that the buyer Two may exchange with another thing by fixing the price at a profitable level. If the thing can not be exchanged with the desired thing but by paying the price to the buyer of that thing of which he is also the owner. Otherwise the exchange/purchase will not possible, because of difference in the price or quality which demands higher price.

(Note: This is not the exact transliteration of the content under this `problem' at P/319, it is the summarized version of the given details.)

PROBLEM:- In the event of deal with intent of profit, it is necessary that the value nature of the desired thing as a profit be indirectly indicated. For example, the man may to say to another that the thing valued Rs.10/- (cost price) along with the thing he has with him (profit).

PROBLEM:- By the cost price is meant the price at which the deal has been mutually agreed upon. Suppose the agreed price is Rs.10/ but the buyer gone the seller some other thing. In terms of `Murabaha' and `Tauliyah' the deal is in order. If the cost of the thing is more than Rs.10/- the deal is Murabaha and if its cost is equal to Rs.10/- then it Taulia. It will be assumed that the deal is of Rs.10/- Murabaha and not the among which the buyer himself paid.

PROBLEM:- There is a system in the market in respect of sale of a thing on the basis of 10-11 (Deh Yazdah). Which means the seller will receive one rupee profit for the sale price of every 10 rupees or its multiple in the upward order. This formula is applicable if instead of the cash cost price the demand may demand a horse on the 10-11 (Deh Yazdah) is understood. The exact price of the horse should be in the knowledge of the buyer, Then only the deal under this formula will be treated as in order. It is also necessary that the sale price should be declared in the same sitting in which the deal is being struck.

PROBLEM:- The capital or the Principle which is meant to be invested in the commercial back on the basis of Murabah and Tauliyah will enhance if the deal includes profit (Murabaha) and will remain unchanged (no profit) or Tauliyah. In the former case the additional expenditure by way of transport charges, brokerage etc, will be added to the capital.

PROBLEM:- The cost of repair of the house plastering, renewal and clearance, digging of the well etc, all incidental or essential charges including the brokerage etc will be added to the cost price of the house.

PROBLEM:- In a deal of Murabaha, if the buyer comes to know that the seller has committed a fraud or breach of trust and wrongfully enhanced the cost price by adding uncalled for items, then it is open for the buyer to pay the demanded price or reject it out right. The fraud or distrust can be assessed in three ways. (1) The seller himself admits the excess in the cost price (2) The buyer establishes his claim by producing witness (3) The buyer took the oath from the seller.

If in the deal of Tauliyah brand, the seller has committed dishonesty, then the buyer can deduct the defrauded amount from the cost and pay the balance as the real cost, before taking possession of the thing.

PROBLEM:- A fraud comes to notice in the deal of Morabaha and buyer wants to return the thing, but before doing so, the thing is lost or has suffered some damage which makes the return necessary, then in such a case the full cost price of the thing will be necessary to be paid before it can be retained by the buyer. It can not returned nor will be get any compensation for the damage.

PROBLEM:- On a thing received by way of compromise (as different for purchase or gift) there can be no dealing on murabaha.

PROBLEM:- A thing was purchased at a exorbitantly high price which no one is willing to pay. It is (morally) necessary to declare this situation in the deal of Murabaha or Tualiyah nature.

PROBLEM:- The thing is sold by way of Tauliyah but the buyer is kept in hard as to what is actual cost price, This is a faulty deal. Then if the buyer comes to know the price through the people (or any reliable way) the buyer may or may not take. If the real fact can not be ascertained even in the midst of people then there is no way to remove the fault. This is also true in the deal of Murabaha.

PROBLEM:- On purchasing an immovable property it is permissible to strike a deal on it, even before formally acquiring its possession, because it is very rare that it shall be destroyed/damaged. If however, such an immovable property (House) or any part of it be such that it may suffer damage, then before getting possession it can not be put on deal (for sale).

PROBLEM:- On purchasing a movable property, it can not be put for a commercial deal before getting possession, but it can be gifted, given in charity, keeping as pawn, lending or for temporary use.

PROBLEM:- IF a movable thing is given as a gift to the seller who accepts it, then the deal is no more remains extant. And if is sold to the seller as a deal, then this deal is not valid. The first deal is still existing.

PROBLEM:- The seller (on selling) himself does some alteration in the character of deal prior to giving it in possession of the buyer, then it can be done in two ways. The first is that the seller does so with the permission of the buyer and the second is that he did without the buyer's permission. If the seller gives the thing as gift, or gives on hire/rent with the buyer's consent, then this amounts to the buyers possession. Or, acting on his own (without buyer's approval) he pawns the thing, or gives on hire/rent or keeps it as a trust and the thing is damaged or destroyed, then the original deal no more remains operative. And if the seller gives it for temporary use, give as a gift or pawned is which the buyer approves, then too the possession of the buyer is established.

PROBLEM:- The buyer tells the seller to keep the thing with some person and he will get thing back later from that person. When he (the buyer) is in a position to pay the amount, the seller does so, this does not mean the possession of the buyer, the thing is still in legal possession of the seller. If that thing is destroyed (in this state) it is the loss of the seller.

PROBLEM:- A thing was bought, but before its possession by the buyer, the seller sells it some person at a higher price, which the buyer approves. Even this is not correct since it was done before the buyer took possession it.

PROBLEM:- Some one purchased things (1) by measurement (2) by weight and (3) by numbers (counting). Now unless is checked in measure, in weight or in numbers, its sale or personal use is not permissible. Or if it is purchased by guess or approximation and the thing in question is present, when the deal is settled, there is no need for its checking. If however these things have been received as gift, inheritance or through execution of a will (deceased's) or was grown in the field, then there is no need even for its measurement, weighing or counting.

PROBLEM:- After the deal if the thing was measured or weighed in the presence of the buyer, then there is no need for the buyer to do so again. However if the thing was measured/weighed in his presence but before the deal was settled or the seller weighed / measured the thing after the deal but in buyer's absence, then it is not enough. It is not permissible, for the buyer to make use of the thing without measuring/weighing again.

PROBLEM:- The seller had weighed the thing before selling. After this, the man in whose presence the thing was weighed, bought that thing without weighing it and struck a deal with it and handed it over to the buyer after weighing it. This is not correct nor permissible as the deal was done before weighing it.

PROBLEM:- If the thing is bought as a package' on a settled price for the entire package. If is permissible. However if the necessary to calculate the total cost/weight etc before taking possession. In case of lump sum right for example in the deal of metal where breaking in pieces is not possible, it is permissible to agree on any process of commercial before taking possession and after paying the cost.

PROBLEM:- Any alteration or change in price usage etc before taking possession if permissible, it can be sold, given in gift, monopoly, sadaqah, or will (wasiyat) every thing byway of Tasarruf (handling, usage) is allowed. Deal in prices is of two natures. Sometimes in terms of down cash, where the deal so does is open to all sorts of manipulatalion by the buyer. The second nature of price is mentioned by way of settled rate where the amount/price is not present. In such a case the thing in deal can not be handled by one except the buyer.

PROBLEM:- The cost of the thing in deal is of two kinds. One is that is fixed by way of weight or measurement where no alteration or manipulation is permissible. And the second norm of price deal is that even after fixing the mode of payment the exact nature of payment remains unsettle or unfixed (as by way of currency in exchange of cash price). For example a thing priced at Rs.100/- does not mean that the entire amount must be in one currency. It may be a 100/- rupee note, 10 notes of Rs.10/- each etc. But in case of a thing priced in exchanged of another object or animal the payable price shall not be other than that particular object.

PROBLEM:- The buyer raises the price for the sake of seller or the seller increase the object of sale. This is permissible. The increase in the article of deal or increase in its price in any shape or form, in the same sitting or after becomes binding. If the buyer repents afterwards as to why he took to raising the price or the quantum of the articles, it will be of no avail.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer increase the price, then to make this increase binding it is necessary that the seller accepts the increase in the same sitting and not afterwards or in another sitting. It is also necessary that the object under deal should be present. An increase after the destruction of the article is not admissible.

PROBLEM:- The seller can refuse the price of the thing for the sake of the buyer, for this the presence of the thing is not necessary. This decrease in the price is permissible even after taking possession of the object.

PROBLEM:- This increase or decrease even if accepted afterwards becomes part of the agreement of deal and it will be take as such for all subsequent processes. The price in any degree will have to remain. The price in total can not be dropped. No commercial deal is valid without the mention of the price howsoever little or reduced it may be.

PROBLEM:- The increase or decrease when made part of he agreement will enable the subsequent Murabaha or Tauliyah (with or without profit) being based in this agreement. The original price or the object will not be taken into account.

PROBLEM:- If the buyer wants to make a reduction decrease in the object, it will be permissible if the object/thing is of merchandise nature, subject to variation in the market that is it is of a fixed nature and not open to change, then no decrease will be admissible.

PROBLEM:- If the seller fixes a time limit for the buyer for the payment of price, after the initial agreement in which no time limit was mentioned then this time limit becomes obligatory for the seller. He can not demand payment of the price earlier then the time limit.

PROBLEM:- The time limit of a repayable deal (loan etc) can also be made subject to certain conditions. For example, A man owes Rs.1000/- to another payable under fixed time limit. The money lender can tell the indebtor that if he pays Rs.500/- by a certain date, the rest 500/- may be paid six months late than the agreed time limit.

PROBLEM:- What ever is given or taken as loan should have the like of it (for return in the same commodity), either it may be in the nature of measurement, weighing or counting in numbers. Normally high priced things are not given or taken on loan, like animal, house, land etc. Loan dealing in such commodities is not desirable.

PROBLEM:- The broad principle in this respect is that whatever is proposed to be taken on loan, it should have its like in the market. Things of which similar ones are not available, to give such things on loan is not desirable. The thing which is considered out of the way in respect of giving as loan, if some one gets such a thing on loan he will become its owner as immediately on taking its possession, but it is not permissible for him to derive monetary benefit from it. But if he put is on commercial deal (sale) he will not be committing wrong.

PROBLEM:- Breads can be taken on loan by counting or by weighing. Meat should be taken on loan only by weighing it.

PROBLEM:- Raw or hard baked breads can be given or taken on loan if there is not much different in their cost.

PROBLEM:- To buy ice by weighing is in order. The price of ice purchased can be paid in winter, if it be mutually agreed. If there is any dispute in this behalf the matter can be settled, even with the intervention/decision by the Qazi, if dispute becomes of that acuteness.

PROBLEM:- Loan taken in cash and should be repaid in the same currency. If the currency then in vogue becomes absolute due to government. policy, then the loan should be in the new currency at the exchange rate.

PROBLEM:- In the matte of repayment of the loan, the fluctuation the rates of things taken on loan is of no concern. The loaned commodity should be repaid at the time of repayment, in cash or in commodity as the case may be.

PROBLEM:- Grain purchased in one city should be repaid at the cost value in another city if the lender demands repayments at the latter place if both men happen to he there. The indebter can not argue to repay at the place when grain was taken on loan.

PROBLEM:- IF the repayment of the grain is demanded at the cost of grain is higher, while the debtor wants to repay at his place of loan, then an assurance shall be obtained form the debtor that he would pay the debt at his place.

PROBLEM:- A thing taken on loan becomes the property of the debtor, he can have a deal with the creditor. However if the creditor desires a deal of his own thing (which he has given on loan) will the debtor, he can not do so because he doesn't possess the right of ownership.

PROBLEM:- Loan should not be given to slaves even if he a trader or purchased on writ (Makati'b). Underage, lunatic, insane, nor can the be pressed if given a load and they refuse to payback.

PROBLEM:- A man takes loan in cash, the debtor comes to the creditor with money in hand to repay the loan, but the creditor under some reason till, the man to throw the money in the water which he does. But the real suffer is the debtor because be has not given possession (repayment) to the creditor. And if the seller brings the object of deal to the buyer or the trustee brings the thing of trust (Amanat) to the owner and they say to throw away the things, the loss in these cases will be that of the purchaser and the owner (because