What is the ruling if the buyer goes bankrupt after the fruit is pollinated and clearly visible?

Primary text

Revocation is not prevented, and the fruit belongs to the buyer, without disagreement, except according to the position of Abu Bakr. The sounder position is that the fruit does not follow the asset in a sale established by mutual consent, thus revocation due to non-consensual dissolution is more appropriate without it. If the seller sold empty land and the buyer planted crops, and then the buyer became bankrupt, the seller reverts the land only, and the crop belongs to the buyer unanimously, as this is an action performed by the buyer.