Home » Hanafi Fiqh » DaruliftaaZambia.com » Iqaalah (Returning) of Item After Purchase

Iqaalah (Returning) of Item After Purchase

Answered as per Hanafi Fiqh by DaruliftaaZambia.com

Question

As Salaamolaikum

Mufti Saheb

Please give me the Shariah Ruling on this.

It is pretty URGENT.

Shukran.

This is the scenario.

My wife and sister in law are in a possession of a very valuable antique item of jewellery.

They have had this item in the family for over a hundred years and its been passed down to them.

They have been trying to sell this item to the best available offer. It’s not an item that they were willing to sell to get monies out of it on the estimate of Gold value, it was an item that they were willing to sell on its original antique value. Please note original.

We visited a store in Johannesburg on Saturday the 23rd Feb 2014.

The Gentleman that served us, asked us several question, which we replied to the best of our ability.

We also made it very clear to him, that we were not looking for someone to buy the item, melt and use it for other items.

He in turn spoke to someone over the phone and they asked us to come back on Monday so that they can check the item out properly and then decide.

We visited the store, they took us up to a workshop, there was a white gentleman there who is been there in their employ for over 25 years, he checked the item and passed on the information to the representative of the company.

We came down to the store and after a long meeting with representative and the owners they gave us an offer.

We told them that since this item does not only belong to Farida Cassim Mehtar, it also belongs to her sister, who is in London, we will have to consult her as well.

They agreed. We left the store, left the item with them. We made a call to Khadija Bhamjee, who felt that they were not getting the best and after a half hour telephonic discussion accepted the offer as well.

We then went back to the store, and told them that we were happy with the offer and here again, it just was not here’s the money take it and run, they had enough time on their hands to decide.

The proposal that we take the bulk in cash and the balance will be EFT, was also accepted. We shook hands at the transaction and let the store.

Now we are on our way to Durban, we get a call that that they had made a mistake in valuing the item.

And that they want their money back and will return the item that we had sold them.

After discussing this with family, we agreed and were told that there was someone in Durban that we could give the money to and they would return our item by air or whatever.

Then we get a call that there is someone on the way with the item and we could meet on the way to do the swop.

We agreed but that did not happen, because we did not meet along the way. Eventually we got home and they arrived a half hour later.

We welcomed them at our home , offered them supper and after supper we were ready to do the swop only to be told that the original item is NOT and original anymore but has been broken into two pieces.

I refused to take the item and told them to take it back and will take advice from the learned and come back to them with the outcome.

Also note that we were not told about this until after supper and even the representative of the shop that we were dealing with was only told of this when he entered the entrance to the building we live in.

I need your ruling on this matter.

AT NO TIME WE DISCUSSED ITEM TO BE SOLD FOR THE WEIGHT IN GOLD.

How they did this and what was their intention, only Allah knows best.

I need the Shariah ruling on this matter.

Out of the goodness of our heart and most importantly, to please Allah we accepted the return of the item and hand over the money.

It was only that the item was not in its original form and even if they repaired this, this item would NOT be original and we will not be able to tell anyone that it is an original item.

Please reply as soon as possible so that we can resolve the matter.

Was Salaam

Answer

Your query constitutes two transactions:

  1. The sale of the antique item to the buyer.
  2. The revocation of the sale.[1] This is referred to as Iqālah in Shari’ah. Through Iqālah, the buyer and seller agree to revoke the initial transaction.

As far as the first transaction is concerned, there is no issue with its validity. However, in the scenario of Iqālah, the following basic conditions of Iqālah have been violated:

  • It is necessary for the Ījāb (proposal/offer) and Qabūl (acceptance) to be conducted in one physical gathering. Since the Ījāb (offer) was made from Johannesburg and you accepted the offer whilst travelling, this basic condition was violated. [2]
  • The Ījāb (offer) and Qabūl (acceptance) have to be conducted in succession of each other in the same gathering without a lengthy delay. Since you only accepted the offer after discussing it with your family, the acceptance of the offer was done in a different gathering than that in which the offer was made. Thus, this condition of Iqālah too was violated. [3]
  • If the Iqālah has been carried out without the initial owner having seen the item, then he has Khiyār-ur-Ru’yah (the right to reject the revocation) if he is unhappy with the item upon seeing it. Since you refused to accept the damaged item, you exercised your right of rejecting the item. Hence, Iqālah did not take place. [4]

Therefore, the item belongs to the party that had purchased it from you and they may not force you to revoke the sale. You are entitled to receive the complete price of the item as was agreed between you and the buyer. The buyer’s error in valuing the item will not affect the sale or the price of the item at all. However, if you wish to take back the item as a gesture of good will, then it is solely up to your wife and sister-in-law to decide.

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Checked and Approved by,

Mufti Nabeel Valli.

Darul Iftaa Mahmudiyyah

Lusaka, Zambia

www.daruliftaazambia.com

__________________________

[1]   الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (5/ 120) [أيج أيم سعيد]

قَبَضَ الطَّعَامَ الْمُشْتَرِي وَسَلَّمَ بَعْضَ الثَّمَنِ ثُمَّ قَالَ بَعْدَ أَيَّامٍ إنَّ الثَّمَنَ غَالٍ فَرَدَّ الْبَائِعُ بَعْضَ الثَّمَنِ الْمَقْبُوضِ، فَمَنْ قَالَ الْبَيْعُ يَنْعَقِدُ بِالتَّعَاطِي مِنْ أَحَدِ الْجَانِبَيْنِ جَعَلَهُ إقَالَةً وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ وَمَنْ شَرَطَ الْقَبْضَ مِنْ الْجَانِبَيْنِ لَا يَكُونُ إقَالَةً عِنْدَهُ اهـ. وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْخَانِيَّةِ.

[2]   الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (5/ 121)

(وَتَتَوَقَّفُ عَلَى قَبُولِ الْآخَرِ) فِي الْمَجْلِسِ وَلَوْ كَانَ الْقَبُولُ (فِعْلًا) كَمَا لَوْ قَطَّعَهُ أَوْ قَبَضَهُ فَوْرَ قَوْلِ الْمُشْتَرِي أَقَلْتُك؛ لِأَنَّ مِنْ شَرَائِطِهَا اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ وَرِضَا الْمُتَعَاقِدَيْنِ أَوْ الْوَرَثَةِ أَوْ الْوَصِيِّ

قال ابن عابدين: (قَوْلُهُ: لِأَنَّ مِنْ شَرَائِطِهَا إلَخْ) عِلَّةٌ لِقَوْلِهِ وَتَتَوَقَّفُ إلَخْ، وَلَا يَرِدُ أَنَّ الْمَعْطُوفَاتِ لَا تَصْلُحُ تَعْلِيلًا لَهُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْعِلَّةَ مَجْمُوعُ مَا ذُكِرَ فَكَأَنَّهُ قَالَ: لِأَنَّ لَهَا شُرُوطًا مِنْهَا اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ فَافْهَمْ.

 

الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (4/ 527)

(قَوْلُهُ: وَإِنْ لَمْ يَذْهَبْ عَنْ مَجْلِسِهِ عَلَى الرَّاجِحِ) وَقِيلَ: لَا يَبْطُلُ مَا دَامَ فِي مَكَانِهِ بَحْرٌ. وَيَبْطُلُ بِالْقِيَامِ وَإِنْ كَانَ لِمَصْلَحَةٍ لَا مُعْرِضًا كَمَا فِي الْقُنْيَةِ قَالَ: فِي النَّهْرِ. وَاخْتِلَافُ الْمَجْلِسِ بِاعْتِرَاضِ مَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى الْإِعْرَاضِ مِنْ الِاشْتِغَالِ بِعَمَلٍ آخَرَ كَأَكْلٍ إلَّا إذَا كَانَ لُقْمَةً، وَشُرْبٍ إلَّا إذَا كَانَ الْإِنَاءُ فِي يَدِهِ، وَنَوْمٍ إلَّا أَنْ يَكُونَا جَالِسَيْنِ، وَصَلَاةٍ إلَّا إتْمَامَ الْفَرِيضَةِ، أَوْ شَفْعٍ نَفْلًا، وَكَلَامٍ وَلَوْ لِحَاجَةٍ وَمَشْيٍ مُطْلَقًا فِي ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ حَتَّى لَوْ تَبَايَعَا وَهُمَا يَمْشِيَانِ أَوْ يَسِيرَانِ وَلَوْ عَلَى دَابَّةٍ وَاحِدَةٍ لَمْ يَصِحَّ. وَاخْتَارَ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ كَالطَّحَاوِيِّ أَنَّهُ إنْ أَجَابَ عَلَى فَوْرِ كَلَامِهِ مُتَّصِلًا جَازَ، وَصَحَّحَهُ فِي الْمُحِيطِ وَقَالَ: فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ: لَوْ قَبِلَ بَعْدَمَا مَشَى خَطْوَةً أَوْ خَطْوَتَيْنِ جَازَ، وَفِي مَجْمَعِ التَّفَارِيقِ وَبِهِ نَأْخُذُ، وَفِي الْمُجْتَبَى الْمَجْلِسُ الْمُتَّحِدُ أَنْ لَا يَشْتَغِلَ أَحَدُ الْمُتَعَاقِدَيْنِ بِغَيْرِ مَا عُقِدَ لَهُ الْمَجْلِسُ، أَوْ مَا هُوَ دَلِيلُ الْإِعْرَاضِ وَالسَّفِينَةُ كَالْبَيْتِ فَلَا يَنْقَطِعُ الْمَجْلِسُ بِجَرَيَانِهَا؛ لِأَنَّهُمَا لَا يَمْلِكَانِ إيقَافَهَا. اهـ. مُلَخَّصًا ط

[3]   درر الحكام في شرح مجلة الأحكام (1/ 153) [العلمية – سـ 2010]

(الْمَادَّةُ 193) يَلْزَمُ اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ فِي الْإِقَالَةِ كَالْبَيْعِ يَعْنِي أَنَّهُ يَلْزَمُ أَنْ يُوجَدَ الْقَبُولُ فِي مَجْلِسِ الْإِيجَابِ، وَأَمَّا إذَا قَالَ أَحَدُ الْعَاقِدَيْنِ: أَقَلْت الْبَيْعَ وَقَبْلَ أَنْ يَقْبَلَ الْآخَرُ انْفَضَّ الْمَجْلِسُ أَوْ صَدَرَ مِنْ أَحَدِهِمَا فِعْلٌ أَوْ قَوْلٌ يَدُلُّ عَلَى الْإِعْرَاضِ ثُمَّ قَبِلَ الْآخَرُ لَا يُعْتَبَرُ قَبُولُهُ وَلَا يُفِيدُ شَيْئًا حِينَئِذٍ.

اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ شَرْطٌ فِي الْإِقَالَةِ فَإِنْ كَانَتْ الْإِقَالَةُ قَوْلِيَّةً وَجَبَ أَنْ يَكُونَ مَجْلِسُ الْإِيجَابِ وَالْقَبُولِ وَاحِدًا وَإِنْ كَانَتْ الْإِقَالَةُ بِالتَّعَاطِي وَجَبَ اتِّحَادُ مَجْلِسِ التَّعَاطِي

درر الحكام في شرح مجلة الأحكام (1/ 141) [العلمية – سـ 2010]

وَكَذَلِكَ إذَا تَبَايَعَ شَخْصَانِ وَكَانَ أَحَدُهُمَا دَاخِلَ الدَّارِ وَالْآخَرُ خَارِجَهَا وَبَعْدَ أَنْ أَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا الْبَيْعَ خَرَجَ الْآخَرُ مِنْ الدَّارِ وَقَالَ: قَبِلْت فَالْإِيجَابُ بَاطِلٌ وَالْبَيْعُ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ. وَكَذَلِكَ إذَا كَانَ الْمُتَبَايِعَانِ رَاجِلَيْنِ أَوْ رَاكِبَيْنِ سَوَاءٌ كَانَا عَلَى دَابَّةٍ أَوْ كَانَ أَحَدُهُمَا رَاكِبًا وَالْآخَرُ رَاجِلًا وَعَقَدَا الْبَيْعَ أَثْنَاءَ سَيْرِهِمَا يُنْظَرُ فَإِذَا كَانَ الْقَبُولُ مُتَّصِلًا بِالْإِيجَابِ فَالْبَيْعُ يَنْعَقِدُ وَإِذَا حَصَلَ الْقَبُولُ بَعْدَ الْإِيجَابِ بِمُدَّةٍ وَلَوْ وَجِيزَةٍ أَوْ فَصَلَ بَيْنَ الْإِيجَابِ وَالْقَبُولِ فَالْبَيْعُ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمَجْلِسَ قَدْ تَغَيَّرَ. وَكَذَلِكَ إذَا كَانَ الْمُتَبَايِعَانِ قَائِمَيْنِ وَبَعْدَ أَنْ أَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا الْبَيْعَ مَشَيَا أَوْ مَشَى أَحَدُهُمَا وَقَبِلَ الْآخَرُ الْبَيْعَ فَالْبَيْعُ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ هِنْدِيَّةٌ “. وَإِذَا كَانَ الْمُتَبَايِعَانِ فِي سَفِينَةٍ أَوْ قِطَارٍ فَكَمَا لَوْ كَانَا فِي غُرْفَةٍ، وَبِعِبَارَةٍ أُخْرَى إذَا صَدَرَ الْقَبُولُ مِنْ أَحَدِهِمَا مُتَرَاخِيًا عَنْ الْإِيجَابِ فَالْبَيْعُ يَنْعَقِدُ. وَسَيْرُ السَّفِينَةِ وَالْقِطَارِ لَا يَمْنَعُ مِنْ انْعِقَادِ الْبَيْعِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ فِي اسْتِطَاعَةِ الْمُتَابِعَيْنِ إيقَافُ السَّفِينَةِ أَوْ الْقِطَارِ.

[4]   الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (5/ 121)

وَبَقَاءُ الْمَحَلِّ الْقَابِلِ لِلْفَسْخِ بِخِيَارٍ

قال ابن عابدين: (قَوْلُهُ وَبَقَاءُ الْمَحَلِّ) أَيْ الْمَبِيعِ كُلًّا أَوْ بَعْضًا لِمَا سَيَذْكُرُهُ الْمُصَنِّفُ نْ أَنَّهُ يَمْنَعُ صِحَّتَهَا هَلَاكُ الْمَبِيعِ، وَهَلَاكُ بَعْضِهِ يَمْنَعُ بِقَدْرِهِ. (قَوْلُهُ: الْقَابِلِ لِلْفَسْخِ بِخِيَارٍ) نَعْتٌ لِلْمَحَلِّ وَبِخِيَارٍ مُتَعَلِّقٌ بِالْفَسْخِ وَوَصْفُ الْمَحَلِّ بِقَبُولِهِ الْفَسْخَ مَجَازٌ؛ لِأَنَّ الْقَابِلَ لِذَلِكَ عَقْدُهُ قَالَ ح أَيْ الْقَابِلِ لِلْفَسْخِ بِخِيَارٍ مِنْ الْخِيَارَاتِ كَخِيَارِ الْعَيْبِ وَالشَّرْطِ وَالرُّؤْيَةِ كَمَا فِي الْفَتَاوَى الْهِنْدِيَّةِ اهـ، وَفِي الْخُلَاصَةِ: وَاَلَّذِي يَمْنَعُ الرَّدَّ بِالْعَيْبِ يَمْنَعُ الْإِقَالَةَ وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْفَتْحِ.

الفتاوى الهندية (3/ 157)

وَشَرْطُ صِحَّةِ الْإِقَالَةِ رِضَا الْمُتَقَائِلَيْنِ وَالْمَجْلِسُ وَتَقَابُضُ بَدَلِ الصَّرْفِ فِي إقَالَتِهِ وَأَنْ يَكُونَ الْمَبِيعُ مَحَلَّ الْفَسْخِ بِسَائِرِ أَسْبَابِ الْفَسْخِ كَالرَّدِّ بِخِيَارِ الشَّرْطِ وَالرُّؤْيَةِ وَالْعَيْبِ عِنْدَ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى – فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ بِأَنْ ازْدَادَ زِيَادَةً تَمْنَعُ الْفَسْخَ بِهَذِهِ الْأَسْبَابِ لَا تَصِحُّ عِنْدَ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى

خلاصة الفتاوى (3/23) [مكتبة رشيدية]

وما يمنع الرد في البيع الفاسد والرد بالعيب يمنع الإقالة

This answer was collected from Daruliftaazambia.com, which serves as a gateway to Darul Iftaa Mahmudiyyah – Lusaka, Zambia.

Read answers with similar topics: