Is it permissible to annul a settlement if it involves extreme exploitation of one of the parties, and is it considered like a sale to one who is easily exploited?

If the reconciliation is concluded with an acknowledgment of a right to property other than that being reconciled, it is considered a sale, and the rulings of sale and the option of ghubn (gross deception) are established therein. If the reconciliation is with prices for prices, it is a currency exchange (sarf). If it is with goods for cash or vice versa, it is a sale. If it is with a usufruct, it is a lease (ijarah). So, if one of the partners has a share in something and their partner acknowledges it, and then reconciles with them for cash or real estate in exchange for their share, this reconciliation is considered a sale, and the rulings of sale and the option of ghubn are established for it. However, if the other party denies the right and the claimant reconciles with them for something, it is a sale in the right of the claimant and a release in the right of the defendant. The option of ghubn is established for the mustarsil (one who is ignorant of the value and does not bargain well) if they are subjected to gross deception. Therefore, the case of the partner claiming ghubn must be examined, and whether the reconciliation was a sale in their right or not. If it was a sale and the deception was significant, they have the option; otherwise, they do not.