When a party admits ownership of an item but then claims a debt related to it, whose statement prevails?

Primary text

The statement of Malik (the original claimant/owner) prevails. This is because the item's ownership was established for him via the admission, but the admitting party (Muqirr) then claimed a debt against it that the claimant does not acknowledge. In this scenario, the statement of the denier (the claimant regarding the debt) prevails.