if it is specific to one of their shares, the partition is void. Al-Shafi'i stated this. Abu Hanifa said: It is not void; rather, the one in whose share the rightfully claimed portion appears is given the choice between rescinding [the partition] and reverting to what remains of his right, just as if he found a defect in what he had taken. Our view is that it is a partition in which the shares were not equalized, so it is void, just as if they had done so while aware of the situation. As for if one of their shares turns out to be defective, it is possible that the matter would be prevented, so we would say the partition is void due to the lack of equalization in value; and it is possible to distinguish between the two, as a defect cannot be avoided, so it does not affect the invalidity, like a sale. If the rightfully claimed portion is in both their shares equally, the partition is not void, because what remains for each of them after the rightful claim is the amount of his right, and because partition is the separation of one's right from the other, and each of them has separated his right. However, if the damage of the rightful claim in one's share is greater—such as if it blocks his path, water channel, place of ablution, or similar things—then the partition is void, because this prevents equalization. If the rightfully claimed portion is in one's share more than the other, it is void, for the reason we mentioned. If the rightfully claimed portion is shared in both their shares, the partition is void, because the third party is their partner, and they partitioned it without his presence or permission; thus, it is similar to if they had a partner they knew about and they partitioned [the property] without him. If they both know of the rightfully claimed portion at the time of partition, or one of them does, the ruling regarding it is as if they did not know it, according to the details we mentioned. And Allah knows best.

Section: If a defect appears in one of their shares that was not known before the partition, he has the right to rescind the partition or revert to the indemnity (arsh) for the defect, because it is a deficiency in his share, so he is entitled to that, like a buyer. It is possible that the partition is void, because equalization is a condition in it, which was not found, unlike in a sale.

Section: If they partition two houses, and each of them takes a house and builds on it, or they partition two plots of land and one of them builds or plants on his share, then his share is rightfully claimed, his building is demolished, and his