Law360 Canada ( June 16, 2022, 6:21 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Billimoria from declaration by trial judge that he had 65 per cent interest in the property, respondents had 35 per cent interest in it, and that the property be sold. The parties jointly purchased the property for $171,900 and paid a $30,000 deposit. They took title as tenants in common, with 50 per cent owned by Billimoria and 50 per cent by the respondents. At the time of purchase, the property was registered in Land Titles. When the parties were unable to rent or sell the property, they agreed that Billimoria would move into it. Mistry claimed that when Billimoria moved in, they had a verbal agreement that although the latter would live there, make mortgage and property tax payments in lieu of paying rent, he and the respondents would remain joint owners and that the property would eventually be sold. Billimoria claimed he was the sole owner of the property and the respondents were dispossessed of their interest in the home as he had been in exclusive possession of the home for over ten years and he paid all the carrying costs. Billimoria claimed the trial judge erred by holding that the respondents could recover possession of the property despite ss. 4, 5, and 15 of the Real Property Limitations Act (“RPLA”) and the property should be sold pursuant to the Partition Act....