What is the ruling when the owner claims usufruct (ghasaba) while the rider claims loan (a'artaniha), and the dispute occurs after a period for which rent is due?

Supporting text

A dissenting view narrated by Al-Muzani attributes to Al-Shafi'i that the statement of the rider prevails, because the owner is claiming compensation, and the default state is the debtor's acquittal from it. Furthermore, the possession is presumed lawful, meaning the statement of the possessor prevails. However, the primary view is established because, unlike the previous scenario where both agreed on the rider possessing the usufruct, here the owner denies the transfer of ownership to the rider, while the rider claims it. The statement of the denier prevails, as the default is the non-transfer of ownership; thus, the owner must swear an oath and is entitled to the rent.