What is the ruling if one partner claims error or deficiency in the division after it has been finalized?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Judiciary
Primary text
If a partner claims error in the division and alleges they were given less than their due, the court must examine the circumstances. If the division was binding through the drawing of lots and did not require mutual consent, the defendant's word is accepted upon taking an oath, and the claimant's assertion is not accepted without just evidence (*Bayyinah*). If the claimant provides two just witnesses, the division is nullified and redone. If there is no evidence and the claimant requests the partner's oath that there is no surplus with them, the partner swears to that effect. The defendant's word is prioritized because the presumption is that the division is valid and trusts were executed.
Supporting text
If the division was one that required mutual consent, such as a division made by the partners themselves, the claim of error is not heard, according to our jurists. However, the correct view is that this case is treated like the former, and if evidence of error is produced, the division is nullified because what is claimed is plausible and established by just evidence. The claim that the right to the surplus is forfeited by initial consent is invalid, as consent only forfeits the right if given with full knowledge; if consent was based on the assumption of receiving the full right and later error is discovered, the right is not forfeited, similar to errors in the quantity of a price or a subject matter of a sale (*Muslam fih*).