What is the ruling when a lessor claims to have rented out a house for a month for ten, and the lessee claims to have rented the entire house for the same amount, with no evidence from either party?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Claims and Evidences
Primary text
When there is a dispute over the description of the contract, the quantity leased, and the absence of proof, both parties must engage in mutual swearing (tahaluf), following the established ruling for such disputes in sales contracts. Based on the opinion cited from Abu Al-Khattab concerning a disputed sale where the buyer claims an additional item was included for the same price, the ruling falls to the seller (here, the lessor) with his oath, as the lessee claims the inclusion of an extra item (the whole house instead of a part) which the lessor denies. Thus, the lessor's word is taken with his oath if evidence is absent.
Supporting text
If one party provides evidence supporting their claim, judgment is ruled in their favor. If both provide contradictory evidence, the evidence nullifies the other. In this case of nullification, judgment defaults to the ruling established when no evidence exists. Alternatively, if a lot drawing (qur'a) is conducted between the conflicting evidences, the ruling goes to the party upon whom the lot falls, which is the opinion of Al-Qadi and the apparent view of the Shafi'i school. A dissenting view from Abu Al-Khattab's followers suggests prioritizing the lessee's evidence because it testifies to an increase in the contract scope.