SARWAR Versus KARAMAT HUSSAIN
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J .‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a defendant (in a land suit) whose Civil Revision against the decree passed against him, has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel states that notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner was ejected as a tenant under the respondents' side in the earlier suit, he had a right to maintain his possession gained again through force, on the ground that he also was a co‑sharer in the disputed land.
3. We do not agree with the learned counsel. Even if it were fact that the petitioner was a co‑sharer, he cannot protect the possession forcibly obtained. If as admitted, in the previous suit the respondents' exclusive possession through tenant was accepted and on that very basis the petitioner was ejected as tenant this would be sufficient to show that the respondents being in exclusive possession were entitled to maintain it to the extent of their share, against every trespasser including the petitioner, who claimed to be a co‑ sharer. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused.
4. M. I. /S‑180/S Petition dismissed.