What is the legitimate course of action that enables the heirs of the deceased to obtain their right to the inheritance without displeasing their mother, knowing that she registered the deceased father's properties to one of the sons to the exclusion of others?

Firstly, the document written by the husband to his wife must be examined. If it was for ease of disposal, then the money is an inheritance, with the wife receiving one-eighth, and the remainder going to the children, with the male receiving the share of two females. However, if it was in the form of a complete transfer of ownership, then a distinction is made between the state of health and illness. The transfer of ownership by a sick person is subject to the ruling of a will, meaning it is limited to one-third of the estate after possession.

Secondly, if the husband gifted to his wife in a legally valid manner while he was healthy, then the wife's gift to her son should be examined. If it was for ease of facilitation, then it is not a gift. If it was to favor some children over others, then there is a difference of opinion: Is it permissible or forbidden? - Some scholars held that it is forbidden and invalid because it sows enmity, and they cited the hadith of Nu'man ibn Bashir: "Do not bear witness for me to injustice," and that the father retracted his gift due to the lack of equality among his children. - The majority of scholars differed, stating that the gift is not invalid and that equality is only recommended.

Thirdly, if both gifts are valid (the father's gift to the mother and the mother's gift to the disabled son), and the right of the son who agreed to give his share to his brother is waived, then according to the Hanbali school of thought, preference is permissible if there is a compelling reason such as disability or a large family. This applies to the disabled son who is responsible for supporting his family. It is incumbent upon the one to whom the right has transferred to act justly and not take the rights of his weak siblings.