What is the ruling when the owner claims usufruct (ghasaba) while the rider claims it was leased (ajartaniha)?

Primary text

The dispute here concerns the obligation to pay compensation (value), as rent is due in both cases, unless the specified rent differs from the customary rent (ajr al-mithl). The statement of the owner prevails along with his oath. If the animal was destroyed immediately after being taken, the owner must swear an oath and take its value. If the animal remained for a period for which rent is due, and the specified rent (al-musamma) is equal to or less than the customary rent, the owner takes the specified amount due to their mutual agreement on its entitlement. There are two legal opinions regarding the necessity of an oath in this instance.