Resolving juridical conflict resultant from diverse factions of Islamic Scholars who either follow the same Mazhab or differ in Mazhab

The Deobandi and Berelvi Differences

1. Since the various Ulema of both factions have compiled Fatawa works which contain fatawa which very often use the same set of secondary sources of Islamic Law (i.e. the early works of the Hanafi scholars),  it is possible to establish a common reference ground and specify within issues codified that an agreement exists on a particular issue of law between these factions. The need to delve into the juridical reasonings of these jurists would not be necessary if they have reached the same conclusions. The respective Islamic jurists can adopt the reasoning process they prefer among such scholars. 

However, where new issues are resolved or issues have been resolved without direct recourse from the secondary sources of Islamic Law, then we need to resolve the possible conflict arising since in the case where the the parties to a marital contract have their religious allegiance to diverse factions of Ulema. However, where both parties follow a single set of Ulema, the resolution mechanism is simple and would rest with the Ulema of that faction. 

2. There would possibly be a need to classify rulings to not only classify Islamic juridical rulings in relation to mazhab, but sometimes also in relation to a faction like in the case of the Deobandis and the Berelvis. Thus, when a ruling is stated to have the consensus of the Deobandi and the Berelvi Ulema, the acceptance thereof, to the divided Muslims, is easy and positive.

3. The classification of fatawa written by later jurists, would also have to be categorized within the factional boundaries as well.