Bava Batra

For did not R. Ishmael lay down that one kind of crop confers a presumptive title to the whole field? So here, one set of ten trees confers a presumptive title to the others, and vice versa.  This, however, is only the case if the other twenty did not produce [in the other two years]; for if they did produce and he did not take the produce, he obtains no hazakah. And in any case [it is necessary that the trees of which he does take the produce] should be spread about the field. [If a man sells a field to two persons, the ground to one and the trees to the other, and] if the one takes possession of the ground and the other takes possession of the trees,  R. Zebid says that the one becomes legal owner of the trees  and the other becomes the legal owner of the ground.  R. Papa strongly objected to this ruling. According to this, [he said,] the owner of the trees has no right whatever in the ground, and the owner of the ground can therefore tell him [when the tree withers], 'Cut down your tree and take it and be gone.' No, said R. Papa, [the law is that] the one becomes owner of the trees and half the ground, and the other of half the ground. There is no question that if a man sells a piece of ground  and retains the trees on it for himself, he is entitled to a certain amount of ground [round the trees]. This ruling would be accepted even by R. Akiba, who said [in regard to a field with a well in it] that the seller interprets the terms of the sale liberally.  For this only applies to a well and a cistern, which do not impair the soil,  but in the case of trees which do impair the soil