If we follow the view that the gemara is discussing Chezkas Shalosh Shanim in the statement of Rav Bibi Bar Abaye what would the original owner claim? If he claims the whole land, don't we say he is lying when we accept the chazaka for the rest of the field? Thanks!
Aryeh Sanders, Bet Shemesh, Israel
No, we do not say he is lying, as long as he himself does not submit a claim or information that contradicts his previous claims. A general point is in order here: Although Beis Din is striving for the true Psak of what to do when two people dispute each other's ownership, nonetheless the "historical truth" is an unknown and not the issue. So, if one has a proof on one piece of the land and not on the other, although giving him only a portion is obviously a contradiction to the "historical truth", since we have no other way to determine the facts except for their relative claims in Beis Din, giving him a partial win is the true Psak and of course "Hamoitzi Meichaveiro Olov HaRaya".
In our case specifically, we will say that since the Muchzak fulfilled the conditions of Chazaka on the field therefore on the field itself he has a Chazaka, and he can be Moitzi from the Marei Kama (original owner). However,since he made no use of the the ridge of bedrock, he has no Chazaka and it remains in the ownership of the Marei Kama.
I hope this answers the question. If not, please get in touch and elaborate a bit on the question.
Shimon Brodie