If someone rents a dira and made up with the bal dira that there should be kosher mezuzahs on every door which he agreed to. However when the socher arrived he saw there were mezuzahs missing. Does the socher have a ta’anah on the dal dira? Is this a shailo of a mekach ta’us? (Please mention any mareh makoms as well to this.)
Answer:
If a condition was made stipulating that there should be kosher mezuzos on all doors, and the condition was not fulfilled, this will be a reason for a claim of mekach ta’us, just like any other condition stipulated between two parties to a transaction.
I have not seen sources on this specific question, but as noted, there is no difference between this condition and any other condition. All conditions, provided they are properly stipulated, are cause for a possible mekach ta’us (meaning that the injured party can void the contract).
Best wishes.
What then is the difference between this and in a case of when someone makes up that the bal dira should make the bedikas chometz which if he doesn’t the masakana is there is not a mechach to’es and the socher must make the bedika himself or pay someone to make it and won’t get the money back from the maschir (See SA HaRav Hilchos Pesach end of Siman 437)
The answer to the first question is rather pashut as it is addressed in the achronim over there in 437 (after close inspection.) What is a bigger question seemingly is what’s the makor for the psak here. Since the Rema writes in Siman 291 sif Beis that if someone rents a house “b’chezkas sheyesh lo mezuzah” and it doesn’t have then it’s *not* a mekach to’es. So what’s the makor for this psak!?!
Leave a comment