Book On Usurped ( Ghasb ) Property

Usurping and taking other's property by force is not lawful. It can take place by taking other's property unjustly. If it is real property the usurping person alone is responsible for the whole property. If one forcibly starts living in a house with owner, he is responsible for half if it is used in equal proportions, or different ratios he is responsible for as much as he uses. The usurper is also responsible for the benefits he gets from the property; he also is responsible for it being destroyed in his hands. If a load carrier usurps the load he carries, he is responsible for it.

Rule (683) If the owner forbids one from holding an unguarded animal of his, and it runs away or forbids from sitting on a chair and it is stolen the other person is not responsible, as long as he is not considered the cause for the loss, otherwise, he is.

Rule (684) If one usurps some property from a usurper, the owner may demand either one for his property, if he demands it from the first usurper he demands it from the second usurper but if the owner demands the second usurper he does not demand any one.

Rule (685) If one keeps and controls another free person and he is destroyed while with him, he is not responsible for the loss even if he is a child unless he has caused the destruction.

Rule (686) If one prevents another person from work he is not responsible for anything to him, unless he has contracted to work for someone, in which case, the intruder is responsible to the employer. If he is working for the intruder the latter must pay worker's wages.

Rule (687) If one releases a horse from his reins and the horse causes damage he is responsible for it, the same rule applies to all animals that can cause damages to other animals or human beings the owner of such animals is liable for the harm they may cause if it is because of owner's neglect like letting them roam free when such animals are supposed to be kept in harness.

Rule(688) If a wall falls on a human being or an animal etc. The owner of the wall is liable if he knew it was about to fall but did not repair, or demolish it to make it safe. The same rule applies if such wall is on a public road and it falls on some one. The liability in both cases comes only when the person harmed does not know about the situation if a person who is seeing the crumbling wall and leans against it or ties the animal near such wall as a result the person or the animal is harmed the owner of wall is not held liable for anything.

Rule (689) Liability for the harm caused to a human being is a personal responsibility payable from his property not by his 'AQILAH, the Clan (literally meaning the clan's commitment by unwritten law of the Bedouins to pay the blood wit for crimes of its members.) Islamic meaning male members of blood relatives from the father's side.

Rule (690) If one opens a door and some one else steals the property therein, the thief is responsible.

Rule (691) If one lights a fire that can spread to other properties in the surroundings, and it does spread he is liable for it but if it usually does not spread and accidentally it did because of wind etc., he is not liable for it.

Rule (692) A Muslim becomes liable for the cost of the wine and the pigs of a non-Muslim tax-payer, provided, they keep such things away from public eyes and also to Muslims for such things due their right of having control over such things, if they keep them for good reason.

Rule (693) It is obligatory to return the usurped property. If it is damaged one is liable for compensation, if it is not possible to return the property one is liable for it in kind or for its price of the day of usurping if it does not have any kind. According to an optional precautionary rule a settlement should be arranged between the concerned parties if the prices of the day of usurping and the day of payment differ.

Rule (694) If it is not the season to find the kind of a property one, in such case, is liable for its cost of the day of payment.

Rule (695) If the market price of the property rises and then goes down one is not liable for such changes, if a quality is added and then it is gone he must return the property plus the price of the added quality. If an added quality is of no value there is no liability.

Rule (696) If an increase takes place in the substance or value of the property, the increase belongs to owner even if such increase is due to usurper's deeds. If the increase belongs to usurper, like if he plants trees on a usurped land he returns the land and compensates for the loss, if there is loss in the substance, and he cannot demand compensation for loss in the substance belonging to him.

Rule (697) If the usurped property is mixed with some substance of its kind, if both are of the same quantity the owner shares him equally if there is difference in quality, the owner shares in proportionate value, and the owner can ask the usurper for replacement. The same rule applies if it is mixed with a different kind and cannot be distinguished like vinegar mixed with honey etc.

Rule (698) If one buys something not knowing that it is usurped, he demands refund from the usurper and the loss he has paid to the owner, but if he knows about usurpation the buyer cannot ask for what he has paid to the owner to offset his losses.

Rule (699) If one usurps land and plants in it, the plantation belongs to him but he has to pay rent to owner; the words of usurper are accepted on oath about the amount of cost when testimony is not available.

Rule (700) It is lawful for the owner to take his property from usurper even by means of using force, if safeguarding one's right would only be possible through an unjust authority it still is lawful but he cannot charge the usurper for the expenses of proving his case.

Rule (701) If one owes another person some money who refuses to pay back he cannot charge such expenses against indebted party unless a condition demanding such expenses is set in a binding contract.

Rule (702) If one can get hold of some property of usurper, he can compensate from it for his losses, and he does not need to ask permission of high sharia authority and his doing this does not depend on whether a high authority in sharia can manage to get his property back or not.

Rule (703) About the usurper's property used to offset one's losses, it does not matter it is of the kind of usurped property or not as well as its being as deposit in the trust of the owner of usurped property or other people.

Rule (704) If the property of usurper is more than he has usurped, one gets only what is equal to his property it is not far from reality to say lawful the selling of the whole and get his right from the sale but it is a precautionary rule to do so with the permission of a high authority in sharia and the rest should be given back to usurper.