Ruling on Return of Land and Breach of Promise – Shariah Decision on Witnesses and Oaths
Source: Fatāwā Rāshidiyyah, p. 588
Question:
A land deal was settled for 84,000. The buyer promised that whenever the seller wanted to reclaim the land, he could take it back by paying 100,000, while the crops harvested would belong to the buyer. This agreement took place in the presence of witnesses.
Two years later, when the seller asked to reclaim the land according to the agreement by paying 100,000, the buyer said: “If you press me, I will sell the land to someone else.”
Influential people were then called, and the buyer was asked to clarify. The buyer claimed that the promise was only for 6 months, which had expired. However, when the witnesses were summoned, they testified that the promise was for 2 years. The buyer had also said at that time: “If you want the land back for yourself, I will return it, but not if you want it for someone else.”
Now, the buyer is ready to take an oath. The question is: who will be required to take the oath — the buyer or the seller?
Answer:
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ʿammā baʿd!
In this case, there is no need for an oath, because the sellers have witnesses. When witnesses are present, there is no requirement for an oath.
However, if there were no witnesses, then an oath would have been required — and that oath would be taken by the defendant (al-muddaʿā ʿalayh). As the ḥadīth states:
((البينة للمدعي.))
(Tirmidhī, Kitāb Mā Jāʾa fī anna al-Bayyinah ʿalā al-Muddaʿī wa al-Yamīn ʿalā al-Muddaʿā ʿAlayh, ḥadīth 3141)
Meaning: “The claimant must bring evidence, and if he has none, then the defendant must take an oath.”
In the present situation, since witnesses exist, the buyer will not be asked to swear. If — hypothetically — an oath were needed, it would fall upon the seller (the defendant). The final judgment, however, will be based upon the testimony of the witnesses, and reliance will be placed upon that.
ھذا ما عندی واللہ أعلم بالصواب
