Rav Huna holds that the one who claims the item was lost of stolen, must swear that the item is no longer in his possession. \u00a0The gemara raises a contradiction from a braita and 4 answers are given (one is rejected). \u00a0A case is brought where one claimed jewels were lost and they took a palace of his instead (when he refused to pay). \u00a0When he then produced the “lost” item which had gone up in value, Rav Nachman said to give him his palace back and return the jewels to the owner. \u00a0Rava tried to agrue with this psak based on our mishna saying that he should have acquired rights to the appreciation by having paid for them. \u00a0But then he himself realizes why the cases are different. \u00a0In connection with this, the gemara raises the issue regarding a loan – if it gets repaid by foreclosing on land and when the borrower gets the money to pay, can he gets his land back? \u00a0Is there a time limit? \u00a0The gemara holds that one can get back his land and there is no time limit. \u00a0However the gemara explains in what cases this law applies and in which circumstances it would not apply. \u00a0The last issue on this topic is at what point of a foreclosure does the creditor get rights to proceeds of the land? \u00a0One who rents an animal and then lends it to someone else and it dies in a typical manner (for which a borrower is responsible and a renter is not) – there is a debate about to whom the borrower pays – to the renter (in the event that he swears that it died in a typical manner) or to the original owner. \u00a0The gemara questions exactly by what mechanism does he acquire rights to the animal?<\/p>\n