JUDGMENT Sen, J.
1. The facts of the case which have given rise to this appeal are set out in the judgment of the connected appeal and need not be recapitulated. The points raised in this appeal do not call for any separate treatment. They have been disposed of in the connected appeal.
2. Plaintiff claimed for possession of the plots in dispute from the defendant. The plaintiff was one out of three co-sharers. The position of the defendant was merely that of a trespasser. Where property is held* in co-ownership, it is open to a co-owner to maintain a suit for ejectment against a. trespasser. It is not necessary that the other cosharers should be joined with him as co-plaintiffs in the suit. The right of the plaintiff is coextensive with the right of the other co-owners. The object of the suit is to recover the property for the benefit of himself and the other co-owners. The lower appellate Court was therefore right-in granting the plaintiff a decree for the entire claim.
3. This appeal is dismissed with costs.