What is the ruling if the buyer becomes bankrupt after harvesting the fruit, or if the fruit is lost due to unforeseen calamity or other reasons?

Primary text

The seller reverts the principal asset, and the fruit belongs to the buyer, except according to the opinion of Abu Bakr. In every instance where the fruit does not follow the tree upon the seller's reversion, the seller is not entitled to demand the buyer cut the fruit before its harvest time. Similarly, if the seller reverts the land containing the buyer's crop, the seller cannot demand its removal before harvest time, because the buyer planted on his land rightfully and accessed the trees rightfully; thus, he is not obligated to remove it before completion, similar to when the principal asset with its fruit or crop is sold, and the owner of the crop owes no rent because he planted on his land a crop that necessitates preservation, thus he is considered to have utilized the land's benefit and owes no compensation.