What is the ruling when a person acknowledges borrowing money and receiving it, and then denies receipt?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
The ruling is the same as above (i.e., the opponent must swear an oath) if he acknowledges borrowing a thousand and receiving it, or says, 'I owe him a thousand,' and then says, 'I did not receive it, I only acknowledged it so that I could receive it.' This is because it is possible he acknowledged receipt based on his agent's statement or his own assumption, whereas testimony is only valid based on certainty.
Supporting text
However, if he acknowledges donating food and then states he did not deliver it, and the recipient claims delivery, the word of the donor is taken as definitive because the presumption is against delivery. If the item was already in the recipient's possession, and the recipient claims delivery while the donor claims he took it without permission, the donor's word is taken as definitive because the presumption is against permission. If the item was in the recipient's possession at the time of the gift, the donor's permission is not considered; rather, a sufficient period for delivery must have passed. The oath must be administered to the party whose word is taken as definitive, based on the reasons previously mentioned.