Generalizability of the Intervening Substitute (Badal Ḥaylūla) to Cases of Excuse for not giving the Original Property to the Owner by the Ignorant Tenant

Financial disputes are among the problems of the country and it takes a lot of time for the judiciary to settle them. The lack of rules to resolve disputes is a problem that judges complain about. For example, a person has ignorantly seized another's property and spent a lot of money on it. In these cases, the renowned majority of the jurists believe that the possessor is obliged to return the other's property to the owner if requested. This fatwa is the focal point of many rulings of the Shari’a courts in order to destroy the appropriated buildings and properties. This study, after examining the reasons presented by the proponents and the opponents, came to the conclusion that if there is a customary excuse, the owner does not have the right to demand giving back the property. He can choose between demanding an exchange or waiting for the excuse to disappear and receiving the original property, and by receiving a substitute, he prompts the delictual exchange of property between the two parties.