Section

As for the eleventh case, in which a creditor comes forward against a beneficiary whose bequest is less than one-third and against the heirs, the matter must be examined. If what the beneficiary received falls within one-third of the estate remaining after payment of the newly appearing creditor’s debt, the creditor has no recourse against him unless the heirs are insolvent. If it exceeds that third, the creditor may recover the excess from whichever of them he finds solvent. As for the amount within the third, he has no recourse against the beneficiary for it unless the heirs are insolvent, as previously explained.

For example, the deceased leaves thirty dinars, of which the beneficiary receives five and the heirs twenty-five. A creditor then comes forward claiming eighteen dinars owed by the deceased. One-third of the estate remaining after this newly claimed debt is four dinars, whereas the beneficiary has received five. If the creditor finds them all solvent, he recovers the excess dinar from the beneficiary and seventeen dinars from the heirs, completing his entitlement. If he finds the heirs solvent but the beneficiary insolvent, he recovers his entire debt of eighteen dinars from the heirs. The heirs then have a claim against the beneficiary for the excess dinar, in proportion to their respective entitlements. If he finds the beneficiary solvent but the heirs insolvent, he recovers all five dinars from the beneficiary and retains a claim against the heirs for the remaining thirteen dinars of his debt. The beneficiary, in turn, has recourse against the heirs for the four dinars he paid on their behalf because of their insolvency. Success comes only through Allah, who has no partner.

Section

As for a third party establishing title to property within one of the shares after partition, or the discovery of a defect in that share, there are three opinions if the partition was made by drawing lots.

The first is that the partition is annulled, whether the property claimed is small or large, and whether the allotted property remains available for return or is no longer recoverable. The loss of whatever has perished is borne by them all, just as when a debt subsequently comes to light. This is the opinion of Ibn al-Mājishūn and his son, ‘Abd al-‘Azīz, with differing reports on this point in Yahyā’s transmitted reports in the Book of Partition.

The second is that the partition is not annulled unless title is established to most of the share, or to an amount whose loss causes harm, subject to the known disagreement over how that threshold is defined. The person from whose share the property is recovered has recourse against his co-sharers under the rules governing sales, according to whether the property remains available for return or is no longer recoverable, whether through consumption, expenditure, alteration, or an event