Are apartments rented under the old rent system – where the tenant can remain in them for life at the same rental value and pass them on to one generation, and their rental value has significantly decreased at present – considered usurped from their owners? And is it incumbent upon the tenant to vacate them even if they do not own another place to live? And should tenants compensate the owners for previous periods? And is it permissible for relatives and in-laws to visit these apartments if they are considered usurped property?

It is not permissible to adhere to the rental law that stipulates the necessity of the lease lasting for the tenant's lifetime and being inheritable, with the rent remaining fixed regardless of the fair market rent. The tenant is considered a usurper if he insists on occupying the rented property based on this unjust law. The property must be vacated at the end of the agreed-upon period or the fair market rent must be paid. It is not permissible to visit the occupants of these houses, which are considered usurped, as this implies an endorsement of the disobedience.