The Government and Local Authority Lands and Buildings (Recovery of Possession) Ordinance, 1970
Section 5
It is observed that since the writ peti- tioners are 'co-owners' of the land they are not unauthorized occupants within the meaning of the said Ordinance and therefore, section 5 which authorized the appellants to evict the unauthorized occupants has no application to the writ petitioners. The expression 'joint own- ers' according to the said dictionary means:
"Two or more persons who jointly own and hold title to property i.e. joint ten- ants, and also partners and tenants in common" ......(14)
The High Court Division has totally misconstrued the expression 'co-owner' and made the above observations. The term 'joint owners' embraces all cases where the property in question is owned by two or more persons regardless of the special nature of their relationship or how it came into being. This expres- sion is synonymous to co-owner. A co- owner means who is in concurrent ownership, possession and enjoyment of property with one or more others. The writ petitioners did not claim that they are in joint possession or co-ownership of the disputed land with the Military Estate Department. Their positive case is that Subedar Md. Giazuddin Chowdhury purchased the lands by different deeds, mutated his name, paid rent to the Government and with prior approval of the plan from RAJUK constructed the buildings. These admitted facts proved that the writ petitioners are not in joint possession with the Military Estate Department and therefore, under no stretch of imagination it can be said that they are 'co-owners' with Military Estate Department in respect of those three plots. Government of Bangladesh vs. Md. Gias Uddin Chowdhury (S.K. Sinha J) (Civil) 9 ADC 65
