Considering the Occupant's Responsibility by Two Hypotheses

In this article, the writer tends to investigate the occupant’s responsibility by two hypotheses.Hypothesis 1: where the occupied person is in the control and availability of the occupant and the same captured one must be given back but if returning that captured one to the owner causes a lot of damage to the occupant, in that case, most of the jurisprudents believe in the necessity of rejecting that matter, but in this article, in addition to mentioning and analyzing the reasons of those people who believe in the rejection of the same captured one, the point in the hypothesis which believes in giving the item back is preferred.Hypothesis 2: where the property of the captured person has been damaged. For this hypothesis, two cases have been taken into consideration. The case of returning the deficiency & lack of transferring that deficiency to the whole property. The verdict for this case is the rejection of the same captured one accompanied with "Arsh" & the other case is lack of establishment of the deficiency and its transfer to the other parts of the captured property about which, this article has considered the situation between this matter that the agent of transfer is occupant and also this matter that the agent of transfer is not occupant. In the first matter, the occupant is responsible & in the second one, the writer considered lack of responsibility for that.