Is it permissible for a son, who previously fenced off a piece of fallow land, and whose case has been submitted to the court, to fence off the land again or cultivate it while the case is under review? And will this new fencing or cultivation be recognized legally or judicially, taking into account that his opponents reneged on an agreement to waive their claim to the land 25 years ago, and that the previous fencing is considered ownership by local custom?

If there is a dispute over land ownership that is referred to the judiciary, then the judiciary is the arbiter, especially since it is more capable of grasping the details and hearing from all parties.

What can be said is: 1. If the land was owned by someone with proof, and they abandoned it, whereupon others reclaimed it, the land remains the property of its original owner. The reclamation by others is considered an unauthorized disposal of another's property.

2. However, if the land was not owned, and the dispute is over who has a better right to reclaim it, then whoever first laid hands on it and fenced it off has a greater right to it, based on the saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him): "Whoever precedes to something that no Muslim has preceded to, then he has a greater right to it." Although some have deemed this hadith (definition) weak, others have authenticated it, and it aligns with Islamic legal principles.

It is not permissible to bypass the one who preceded except with their permission and consent, provided that their fencing remains and the duration is not prolonged. If the fencing disappears or the duration is prolonged, then all are equal.

If a dispute arises over who preceded, the judiciary will examine the evidence and circumstantial indicators.

It is advisable to await the court's judgment and not hasten to lay hands on the land to avoid escalating the dispute.