Bay-bil-Wafaa

QUESTION:

Person A sells a property to person B. He sells the property at a very cheap price with a pre-condition that the day he decides to sell, he must offer it to him first at the same price as he bought it. Would this agreement be binding on the buyer? In the case where the person is deceased and the property falls into the hands of the heirs, do the heirs also have to sell the property back to person A at his price?

ANSWER:

The Fuqahaa have stated that if a seller sells his property without attaching any conditions prior to the sale or in the sale agreement, but instead takes a pledge from the buyer to the sell the property back to him after concluding the current deal/transaction, then such a sale will be considered to be valid. The buyer who has now assumed ownership of the property should then Diyaanatan fulfill the pledge that he has made to the seller (ex-owner) of selling the property to him at a later stage.

However, if the seller attaches the condition (that the buyer must sell the property to him after one year for example) in the transaction or before concluding the transaction, then the current transaction (sale of the property) is not even regarded as binding on the transacting parties, as this sale transaction becomes Faasid. [Ref:- Ahsanul Fataawa Pg.507 Vol.6; see also: Fataawa Mahmoodiyya, Vol. 24, Pg. 275/6; Meeruth Edition].

In fact, if a condition is included in the sale transaction of giving back the property to the owner in lieu of the original price, then according to Hadrat Mufti Mahmood Hasan Saheb Gangohi (Rahimahullah), this is not a transaction of sale, but a transaction of Rahn. [Ref: Fataawa Mahmoodiyya, Vol. 24, Pg. 275/6; Meeruth Edition].

Hence, in the queried scenario, the seller sells the property on condition that the buyer sells it back to him at the same price at which he purchased it. Since the condition forms part of the agreement of sale, the transaction will be considered as corrupt. Such a transaction should be cancelled and a new transaction concluded without attaching any conditions (in the transaction) that will render the transaction corrupt (as explained above).

بيع الوفاء ذكرته هنا تبعا للدرر: صورته أن يبيعه العين بألف على أنه إذا رد عليه الثمن رد عليه العين، وسماه الشافعية بالرهن المعاد، ويسمى بمصر بيع الأمانة، وبالشام بيع الإطاعة، قيل هو رهن فتضمن زوائده، وقيل بيع يفيد الانتفاع به، وفي إقالة شرح المجمع عن النهاية: وعليه الفتوى وقيل إن بلفظ البيع لم يكن رهنا..وفي حاشية الفصولين عن جواهر الفتاوى: هو أن يقول بعت منك على أن تبيعه مني متى جئت بالثمن فهذا البيع باطل وهو رهن، وحكمه حكم الرهن وهو الصحيح(الدر المختار و حاشية ابن عابدين 5/276)

و لا بيع بشرط لا يقتضيه العقد ولا يلائمه وفيه نفع لأحدهما أو فيه نفع… المراد بالنفع ما شرط من أحد العاقدين على الآخر، فلو على أجنبي لا يفسد ويبطل الشرط(الدر المختار و حاشية ابن عابدين 5/85)

و يجب على كل واحد منهما فسخه قبل القبض أو بعده ما دام المبيع بحاله في يد المشتري إعداما للفساد لأنه معصية فيجب رفعها (الدر المختار و حاشية ابن عابدين 5/91)

ثم إن ذكرا الفسخ فيه أو قبله أو زعماه غير لازم كان بيعا فاسدا، ولو بعده على وجه الميعاد جاز لزم الوفاء به؛ لأن المواعيد قد تكون لازمة لحاجة الناس، وهو الصحيح كما في الكافي والخانية وأقره خسرو هنا والمصنف في باب الإكراه وابن الملك في باب الإقالة بزيادة (الدر المختار و حاشية ابن عابدين 5/277)

ALLAH TA’ALA ALONE IN HIS INFINITE KNOWLEDGE KNOWS BEST!

ANSWERED BY:

Maulana Abdul Kader Fazlani

Date: – 05 Safar 1445 / 22 August 2023

CHECKED AND APPROVED BY:

Mufti Mohammed Desai Saheb