He was asked—may Allah sanctify his soul and illuminate his grave:

A house was jointly owned by two people. One of them sold it to another person, acting on his own behalf and as his partner’s agent. The buyer then erected a substantial structure above the property he had purchased. Among its appurtenant rights was a water channel adjoining the wall of a burial site. It made the wall damp, and the dampness spread to the grave. The owners of the burial site brought a complaint against the buyer before the public oversight authority. Expert witnesses testified that the channel was causing dampness in the wall which reached the grave, that the channel had been added against the wall, and that it caused harm requiring its removal from that location. The buyer was therefore required to relocate it.

Does the construction and demolition undertaken by the buyer prevent him from returning the property, or not? If it does, is he entitled to compensation for the defect?

If such an entitlement is established, must it be claimed immediately, so that it lapses through delay, or may it be claimed later without lapsing? As for what he was required to demolish and did demolish, does his entitlement to compensation for it lapse or not?

If it is held that compensation must be claimed immediately, and he has witnesses attest that he is claiming it, but then deals with the property after that attestation, does his entitlement lapse or not? If he retains that entitlement, may he claim against the agent for both the share sold from the agent’s own property and the share belonging to his principal, or only for the agent’s own share?

He answered:

If the water channel was installed somewhere it was not permissible to install it, the person who installed it must remove what he was not entitled to install. If the buyer was unaware of this, but rather