CHANCERY. 495

The right of a joint owner of property to have it partitioned or sold in lieu of
partition, does not depend upon the extent of his interest. A sale of the common
property may be decreed upon the bill of any concurrent owner where it appears
that same cannot be divided among the parties entitled without loss or injury.
Cases reviewed. Lewis v. Carver, 140 Md. 131.

There may be no partition between a life tenant and a remainderman since this
section does not apply to such a case. There may, however, be partition where a
one-half interest is owned by the plaintiff and the other one-half interest is owned by
one person for life with remainder over. Disposition of fund. Tolson v. Bryan, 130
Md. 340.

A bill may be filed under this section for the sale of a remainder, owned jointly
during the life of the life tenant. Downin v. Sprecher, 35 Md. 484; Billihgslea v.
Baldwin, 23 Md. 106.

Plaintiffs held to have taken an interest in property under a will and to be
entitled to file a bill under this section. Plaintiffs' interest held to be concurrent. The
right given to some of the owners of a one-seventh interest in certain property
to file a bill under this section is not affected by the fact that the will conferred
upon the executor a naked power to sell and convey the other six-sevenths interest.
Booth v. Eberly, 124 Md. 23; Lewis v. Carver, 140 Md. 132.

Specific performance of an alleged contract denied, and a decree for the sale of
the property under this section upheld. Rickard v. Neff, 130 Md. 94.

A bill held to have been filed under this section, and not under sec. 59, and hence,
that the bill need not be retained in order that a guardian ad litem might be
appointed under sec. 60. Where the guardian joins in the bill, and there is proof
that the property is not susceptible of partition without loss and injury, a sale may
be decreed. Koontz v. Koontz, 79 Md. 360; Benson v. Benson, 70 Md. 257; Earle
v. Turton, 26 Md. 33; Lawes v. Lumpkin, 18 Md. 340; Dalrymple v. Taneyhill, 4
Md. Ch. 173. Cf. Mumma v. Brinton, 77 Md. 200; Gill v. Wells, 59 Md. 499.

This section distinguished from sec. 59. Where lands of an infant are sold under
this section, the proceeds go to the guardian. Benson v. Benson, 70 Md. 257; Bolgiano
v. Cooke, 19 Md. 392.

A proceeding under this section distinguished from proceedings under art. 46,
sec. 8, et seq. On a bill praying for partition and general relief, if the commissioners
appointed to divide the land- report that it is not susceptible of partition, and
such report is ratified, the property may be sold and the proceeds distributed without
amendment .of the bill. Johnson v. Hoover, 75 Md. 489. And see Billingslea v.
Baldwin, 23 Md. 114; Campbell v. Lowe, 9 Md. 509; Tomlinson v. McKaig, 5 Gill,
274; Roser v. Slade, 3 Md. Ch. 91.

This section authorizes the sale of lands where they are held jointly, whether by
descent or by purchase. This section is in pari materia with the act of 1831, ch. 311,
and the act of 1839, ch. 23, and must be construed in connection with them.
Billingslea v. Baldwin, 23 Md. 114. And see Smith v. Townshend, 27 Md. 390;
Lawes v. Lumpkin, 18 Md. 340; Hewitt's Case, 3 Bl. 185. Cf. Roser v. Slade, 3 Md.
Ch. 91.

It is only where property cannot be divided in kind without loss or injury that
a sale may be had; proof held insufficient to authorize a sale and that the property
should be divided in kind. A partition may be had without amendment of the
bill where the prayer is for a sale and for general relief. Rowe v. Gillelan, 112 Md.
111.

Questions of title, and of adverse rights, cannot be raised or passed on in partition
proceedings. Jurisdiction under this section depends upon community of interest.
Savary v. DaCamara, 60 Md. 147. And see Williams v. Harlan, 88 Md. 4; Boone v.
Boone, 3 Md. Ch. 497.

Partition will not be denied because of the difficulty or inconvenience attending
it. On a bill praying for a sale and general relief, partition may be had. Construction
of the acts of 1875, ch. 72, and 1831, ch. 311. Campbell v. Lowe, 9 Md. 509.

Where the answer to a bill for the partition of a ground-rent shows that the
validity of an outstanding lease is questioned, the court should hold the bill for
a reasonable time so that such validity may be tested. Partition or a sale will be
decreed, although the expenses of the proceeding more than consume the value of
the property. Brendel v. Klopp, 69 Md. 4.

Partition may be decreed although certain infant defendants are entitled to
executory devises in the land sought to be sold. Harris v. Harris, 6 G. & J. 115;
Tolson v. Bryan, 130 Md. 341.

Where land is sold under this section, the mutation from realty to personalty
does not take place until the sale has been ratified and the purchaser has complied
with its terms. Betts v. Wirt, 3 Md. Ch. 116.