Is it permissible for an agent of some of the heirs not to fulfill the agreed-upon covenant regarding the apartment's rent, to deny the maintenance expenses that were incurred with the heirs' knowledge, and to demand an increase in rent after occupancy? Does the questioner bear all the expenses he spent on maintenance? Is it permissible for some of the heirs to close off part of the property and prevent others from benefiting from it for years? Do the remaining heirs have the right to demand from them the value of the rent for the closed period? Is it permissible to force one of the heirs to sign a lease contract for a higher value and threaten him with the seizure of his share? Is it permissible for the agent to dispose of the heirs' money and rights without a power of attorney from some of them, especially the orphans? Is it permissible to delay the liquidation of the heirs' rights despite their repeated demands?

If the heirs agree that one of them shall reside in an apartment they own for a specific period at a known rent, then the contract must be adhered to, as it is a binding contract. This entails the lessor's ownership of the rent and the lessee's ownership of the usufruct. It only terminates upon the expiration of the term or by mutual consent.

Regarding what the lessee spends on maintenance: - If the maintenance was done with the owner's permission, the lessee is entitled to be reimbursed for it. - If it was done without the owner's permission, the lessee is considered a volunteer and has no right to claim what was spent, unless what was added can be removed without damage to the apartment.

Regarding some heirs locking the ground floor: - This is not permissible except with the consent of all adult and sane heirs. - If not all agree, the inheritance must be divided (by usufruct division, mutual agreement, or lottery), or the house sold and its price divided. - If the adult heirs agree not to divide, they become partners, and none of them may act without the permission of the others.

Regarding claims against the one who locked the apartment: - If the locking was without the consent of the other heirs, then the one who locked it is considered a usurper, and owes the fair market rent for the period it was locked, whether they benefited from it or not.

Regarding orphans' money: - It is not permissible to dispose of their money except by their legal guardian and for their benefit, and nothing may be taken from it except by a lawful right.

Disputes of this nature are decided by the Sharia judiciary.