Is a bankrupt person's confession regarding the seller revoking ownership of fruit before its budding accepted if creditors deny it?

Primary text

If the bankrupt person (Mufllis) confirms the seller revoked ownership of the fruit before budding (ta'bir), and the creditors deny it, the bankrupt's confession is not accepted. This is because the creditors' rights have apparently attached to the fruit. The creditors must swear an oath that they do not know the seller revoked ownership before budding. This oath is established for them initially and is not substituted by the bankrupt, unlike when the bankrupt claims a right and provides one witness; in that latter case, the creditors cannot swear alongside him because the oath rests solely on the bankrupt. An individual cannot swear an oath to establish a right for someone else, and agency in oaths is not permissible. In this matter, the principle is that the creditors' rights attached to the fruit because it was in their trustee's possession and connected to the palm tree, and the seller claims something that removes their rights. Thus, it resembles other assets of the bankrupt's property. Their oath is taken based on negating knowledge, as it is an oath regarding the negation of a debt owed by the deceased (the bankrupt).