What is the ruling when a claimant proves theft and wrongful seizure (ghasb) and the defendant swears by divorce and manumission that he neither stole nor wrongfully seized the property?

Primary text

If a man claims another stole property from him and wrongfully seized other property, and the defendant swears by divorce and manumission that he did neither, and the claimant then supports his claim with one male witness and two females testifying to the theft and seizure, or with one male witness and an accompanying oath, the claimant is entitled to the stolen and wrongfully seized property because the evidence presented is sufficient to establish financial claims. However, the divorce or manumission is not established because this specific evidence serves only to establish financial liability, not divorce or manumission.