The ruling on the sale by a usurper of usurped property at a price lower or higher than what the owner would have sold it for

The questioner : Yes. The usurper took the goods on our way to another market. They were lost three times or twice. And the man sold the remaining goods at a doubled price. And the usurper was found in the land from which they were taken. Does he give us the first price or the price that followed it?

The Shaykh : As for the principle that a usurper is not liable for what is diminished in price due to usurpation, then no. But the stronger view is that he is liable, especially in the case you mentioned, because he prevented him from this profit, so he is liable.