Two people established a partnership with one party paying money and the other party with real estate property. Later, the owner of the real estate property asked his partner, who had contributed cash, to withdraw, under the pretext that he no longer needed his help in running the company. The company sold its products to an untrustworthy person who may not pay the price. Consequently, the ejected partner demanded his right in both capital and the sold commodities. However, the real estate proprietor refused to pay him under the pretext that both partners are to bear the loss because the sold property whose price has not yet been paid is considered a loss.
What is the Sharee'ah ruling on the demand of the first, ejected, partner who considers his ejection harmful to him and therefore it is the other partner who has to bear the loss?

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, sallallaahu 'alyhi wa sallam, is His slave and Messenger.

A partnership with one party paying money and the other party contributing with real estate - or both of them contributing with real estate is a controversial issue among the scholars. The majority of scholars are of the view that it is void as partnership entails that everybody, when terminating the partnership, should take his capital or its equivalent. The share in this kind of partnership has no equivalent so that one may take it.  Furthermore, the value of the real estate may rise to the extent that it yields all gains or money. It may, however, decrease, which will entail that the other partner would incur a share in the original decreased value of the real estate property. Imaam Ahmad according to one of two different reports on his authority in this regard, and Imam Maalik permitted partnership with real estate on the condition that their value at the time of contracting is considered the capital. According to this opinion, such partnership is only permitted if the two partners agree on considering the value of the real estate property whose value at the time of contracting is defined to be the capital. When the partnership comes to an end, every partner should take his capital and incur either loss or profit if there is any. Alternatively, if both parties agree that one party pays money while the other pays real estate property and finally every party takes his respective capital, money or real estate, this is a void contract that cannot be considered partnership.

Consequently, each party, in the case in question, will have his capital or what remains thereof and each is asked to pay the wage of the other partner.

Allaah Knows best.