This is a nuanced area of property law, and the general answer is that one co-owner cannot simply evict another co-owner from jointly owned property in Ahmedabad, because every co-owner has an equal legal right to possession and enjoyment of the entire property, not just a specific portion of it, until a formal partition has taken place. Under general principles of co-ownership law, each co-owner is entitled to be in possession of every part of the joint property, subject to the equal rights of the other co-owners, and one co-owner's occupation of a specific part of the property does not, by itself, exclude the others from their equal right to enjoy the whole.

This means that if one co-owner is occupying the entire property or a specific portion and refusing to allow another co-owner access, the excluded co-owner generally cannot simply be "evicted" by the occupying co-owner asserting superior rights — there is no superior right, since co-ownership implies equal entitlement. Instead, the appropriate remedy for a co-owner who has been excluded is either a suit for joint possession, seeking a court order restoring their right to access and use the property, or, more definitively, a suit for partition under the Partition Act, 1893, to have the property formally divided so that each co-owner receives an exclusive, separately demarcated share.

Where one co-owner has been in exclusive possession for a very long time and has effectively excluded the others, and where this exclusion was clearly communicated and hostile rather than merely a practical arrangement, this could theoretically raise adverse possession questions under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, though courts apply this doctrine cautiously between co-owners for the same reasons discussed in family adverse possession disputes — courts generally presume possession by one co-owner is on behalf of all, absent clear evidence of hostile exclusion.

If a co-owner in exclusive possession has been collecting rental income from the property without accounting to the other co-owners, the excluded co-owners have the right to seek an account of such income and their proportionate share, potentially through appointment of a Receiver under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC if the situation warrants such intervention pending resolution of the broader dispute.

Given how much these disputes depend on the specific history of possession and whether any genuine hostile exclusion has occurred, an honest assessment of your situation by experienced counsel is valuable before deciding on the right approach. For representation before Ahmedabad's courts, the Top Property Lawyers in Ahmedabad | Aapka Legal Advice directory can connect you with suitable counsel, and reach out via Aapka Legal Advice for guidance on securing your rights as a co-owner.

In conclusion, a co-owner generally cannot evict another co-owner in Ahmedabad, since both hold equal rights to the entire property — the appropriate remedy for an excluded co-owner is a suit for joint possession or, more definitively, a suit for partition under the Partition Act, 1893, to secure a separately demarcated share.