Guaranteeing what is lost from the land when the buyer uproots its plants and demolishes its structures

The questioner:
The Shaykh’s case and the narrators’ case. The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: There is no consideration for the damages that occur to the land, perhaps the buyer did not take anything from it.

The Shaykh:
How is it?

The questioner:
The father (may Allah have mercy on him) said: There is no connection to what happened to the land from the parties. And that is that the Muslim seeks permission from the partner when buying.

The Shaykh:
Because he did not transgress, because he did not transgress, he took his money, he took the plants from the land, and he has the right to take them. What results from what was permitted is not guaranteed. He was permitted, except that he uproots the trees if he wishes. And what results from what was permitted is not guaranteed upon him. He demolished the wall and took the stones. Some digging or some rubble occurred in the land. There is no blame on him for that; because it is not possible to vacate the property except by doing so, and he is permitted to do this, so he did not transgress.

The questioner:
It perished.

The Shaykh:
The usurper, the usurper is the one who, if he uproots his trees or demolishes his building, guarantees the resulting damage; because he is not permitted to plant or build, he is a transgressor.