QUESTION:
A buyer placed an order for 2000 bags of medium-sized onions. the buyer paid for his order but it appears that at the time of loading the delivery, the buyer did not check to see that his order was correct and relied on the Manager of the farm to do so. When the onions arrived in Congo, the buyer expressed his dissatisfaction with the size being too big and not selling. The buyer proposed a k20 refund on each of the 2000 bags. I offered to meet him halfway and refund him k10 per bag, which equates to both of sharing the loss 50/50, which he refused and is demanding a full refund. Please advise me on the correct way to settle this matter.
ANSWER:
Since the buyer was not supplied the correct goods (i.e. medium size onions), he is entitled to return the goods to the supplier in lieu of a full refund. It was the duty of supplier to ensure that the correct goods were supplied.
However, we understand from the query that the goods have already been shipped to Congo, and returning it to the supplier could prove to be a costly exercise. However, it is incorrect for the purchaser to request a discount on the goods. He can either keep the goods at the full price, or return the goods for a full refund.
Yes, another way of resolving the matter is that the purchaser claims a full refund from the seller and returns the goods. The seller agrees to refund the goods in full and appoints some agent in Congo to take possession of the goods. Thereafter, the purchaser may offer to purchase the goods at a discounted price. This arrangement will be in order with the proviso that the seller accepts the purchaser’s offer.
Or the purchaser agrees to take the goods at the price that he paid. The seller then voluntarily (without any form of coercion) gives the purchaser a gift of K20 for every bag purchased from him. This is not an agreement rather the seller is at liberty to give the seller a gift at his discretion if he is willing to do so. However, he cannot be held to it. These are the options that come to mind.
Finally, it is only in a partnership where both partners are equal investors that profits and losses are equally shared. In this instance, there is no partnership, hence the principle of sharing losses is not applicable.
من وجد بالمبيع عيبا أخذه بكل الثمن أو رده لأن مطلق العقد يقتضي وصف السلامة فعند فواته يتخير كي لا يتضرر بلزوم ما لا يرضى به دل كلامه أنه ليس له إمساكه وأخذ النقصان لأن الأوصاف لا يقابلها شيء من الثمن في مجرد العقد ولأنه لم يرض بزواله عن ملكه بأقل من المسمى فيتضرر به ودفع الضرر عن المشتري ممكن بالرد بدون تضرره أطلقه فشمل ما إذا كان به عند البيع أو حدث بعده في يد البائع وما إذا كان فاحشا أو يسيرا كذا في السراج الوهاج(البحر الرائق 6/39)
ويجوز للبائع أن يزيد للمشتري في المبيع ويجوز أن يحط من الثمن ويتعلق الاستحقاق بجميع ذلك فالزيادة والحط يلتحقان بأصل العقد عندنا (الهداية 3/60)
Re: – Fataawa Darul Uloom Zakariyya Vol.5 Pg.73 / Re: – Fataawa Ibaadur Rahmaan Vol.9 Pg.493/545
ALLAH TA’ALA ALONE IN HIS INFINITE KNOWLEDGE KNOWS BEST!
ANSWERED BY:
Maulana Abdul Kader Fazlani
Date: – 13 Safar 1445 / 30 August 2023
CHECKED AND APPROVED BY:
Mufti Mohammed Desai Saheb
