On 71a the Mishna says if one sells a field, he keeps the pit. R' Akiva says the original owner must now buy the rights to access the pit from the new owner of the field. As the Gemora explains in a few places, R' Akiva holds Moicher b"ayin Yofo hu Mocher.
I can understand in a case where someone sells a house, b'ayin yofe could mean the new owner gets the old outdoor furniture etc because he is completely moving away and he gives it all be'ayin yofe. He has no more gesheften here. But when he is keeping the pit and knows he will need to access it, why would he sell the rights and then have to go "handle" with the new owner and pay to get the rights back?
When people go into a real estate transaction each side brings their own lawyer to make sure they get the best dela for their client. This is surely not in the best interests of the seller.
Yisroel Alter Pacanowski, Melbourne, Australia
I think the central idea here is that we take the words of the contract literally. However, the question is how literally . "Ayin Yafah" means that we give the absolute literal meaning even if, in a certain sense, it does not make sense. Sure, it does not make sense, but that is what it says . So, faced with a tradeoff of following what is says or what we think about what it says, Rebbi Akiva says the text of the contract is supreme.
As to your question about the lawyer, the task of the lawyer (or the smart seller) is to ensure that the actual words of the contract express his best interests in an unequivocal fashion.
These are my thoughts from having learned the Sugya recently. Bli Neder, I will look a bit in the Rishonim and if I come up with more, we will let you know.
Shimon Brodie