its price. The Qadi said: It is not permissible for him to return it, because it would lead to disparity (tafadul), so it is not valid; for the return is an annulment of the contract and a removal of it, thus the exchange does not remain, and he only pays the compensation (arsh) as a substitute for the defect that occurred in his possession, in the position of one who commits an offense against it while in the owner's possession without a sale, and as if the judge had annulled it against him. According to the other narration, the judge annuls the sale, the seller returns the price, and he demands the value of the ornament; because it was not possible to disregard the defect, nor to take the compensation. The followers of al-Shafi'i have two views, like these two narrations. If the ornament is destroyed, he annuls the contract and returns its value, and retrieves the price; for the destruction of the sold item does not prevent the validity of the annulment. In my view, when the judge annuls it, it is mandatory to return the ornament and the compensation for its decrease, as we said regarding the case where the buyer annuls it according to the other narration. He only reverts to its value when returning it is impossible due to destruction or inability, and there is no disparity in returning it and returning its compensation; because the exchange has ceased by the annulment, so no equivalent remains for it. This compensation is merely in the position of compensation for damage inflicted upon it. Because if its value exceeds its weight or falls short of it, it would lead to disparity; since its value is a substitute for it, this is not permissible, unless he takes its value in a different genus. If he sells a qafiz of something that involves usury for the like of it, and finds in what he received a defect that decreases its value but not its measurement, he does not have the right to take its compensation, so that it does not lead to disparity. The ruling regarding it is according to what we mentioned regarding ornaments for dirhams.

745 - Issue; He said: (If he discovers a defect after he has emancipated her or she died in his possession, he has the right to the compensation).

In summary, it is that if the buyer's ownership of the sold item ceases due to emancipation, endowment (waqf), death, killing, or if the return becomes impossible due to birth-giving (istilad) or similar causes before he learns of the defect, he has the right to the compensation. This is what was said by