If the honest intermediary paid the mortgagee in the absence of the principal debtor without proof, can the principal debtor seek recourse against the intermediary?

Primary text

There are two narrations (Riwayatayn). One narration states that the principal debtor may seek recourse against the intermediary because the intermediary was negligent in making the payment without proof, thus the guarantee falls upon him, similar to if the pledge (Rahn) was destroyed due to his negligence. This is potentially the meaning behind the statement of Al-Kharqi: whoever mandates someone to pay money to another, and the agent claims payment, his word is not accepted against the principal unless there is proof.