What is the ruling regarding rent in an invalid lease if the lessee takes possession and the period expires?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Leasing
Primary text
There are two narrations from Ahmad concerning an invalid lease where the lessee took possession and the term expired (or a period sufficient for usufruct realization passed). One narration states that the lessee owes rent equivalent to the usufruct's value (*ujrat al-mithl*) for the duration it remained in his possession, which is the position of Shafi'i, based on the principle that lost usufruct in one's possession for an unfulfilled consideration reverts to its value, as if it had been fully utilized. The second narration states that nothing is due to the lessor, which aligns with Abu Hanifa's position, as it is an invalid contract for usufructs that were not realized, thus the compensation is not binding, akin to an invalid marriage (*nikah fasid*).
Supporting text
If the usufruct was realized in an invalid contract, the rent due is the usufruct's value (*ujrat al-mithl*), according to Malik, Shafi'i, and an opposing view to Abu Hanifa. Abu Hanifa asserts that the lesser of the agreed nominal price or the usufruct's value is due, based on the premise that usufructs are not guaranteed except through a valid contract. The rebuttal is that what is guaranteed by the nominal price in a valid contract must be guaranteed by the full value in an invalid one, similar to tangible assets.