Analyzing the situation of expropriation in common property and its relation with public order

In communal property, one of the partners may illegally and without permission encroach on the share of other owners and take it over. In this case, each of the owners alone can request the eviction of the occupier from the court by proving that the occupation is illegal and without permission, which is usually done in the form of two lawsuits, eviction and eviction. In the case of expropriation of joint property, the property is not transferred to the convict after expropriation, because in joint property, all the owners have joint ownership, except for the property, and the order to dispose of and seize one of the owners, whether he wants it or not, causes It will be usurping the rights of other partners, which is against the legal and Shariah standards. This problem has caused some lawyers, assuming that the lawsuit is not enforceable, basically consider such a lawsuit unhearable and reject the lawsuit by ordering no hearing. In this article, by examining the judicial opinions and explaining the legal arguments cited by judges and jurists regarding the admissibility or inadmissibility of a court case, we will prove that the non-enforceability of a decision is not related to its ability to be heard, and the court case is similar to Other definitively unenforceable claims will be subject to hearing. Then, we will explain the differences and their unique effects by comparing the lawsuits of disposing of and putting on with each other.