I cross posted and am glad to see that you have found mumnet's 'legal department'.
To paraphrase Gordon Gekko - Hate is GOOD! Hate is an energy that can inspire us to 'find a way'. And where there's a will, there's always a way and there's nothing like winning to lead us back to loving those we hate
If you change the locks and put tenants into the property I very much doubt that he will be able to summarily evict them.
It occurs to me that if you were to embark on a path to which he does not give his prior consent in relaton to the disposal of the property you hold in common, he may need to commit more of his finances engage in a costly legal dispute against yourself, and possibly said tenant(s)
Providing that you have scrupulously reserved half of the rental income minus the usual deductions to be paid to him (preferably in an account set up solely for that purpose) as and when required/ordered to do so, and have ensured that any lease/tenancy agreement stipulates a reasonable period of notice in the event that the property is sold (which, given his intransigence, seems unlikely in the near future), I doubt that any county court will sentence you to be hung, drawn and quartered - more particularly, not in this present economic climate when it's every wo/man to the treadmill of providing properties for rent to those who've fallen foul of the cap on HB in need while keeping themselves from the workhouse adding to the annual bill for state benefits.
Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law but in the civil courts which, thanks to one Alfred Thomson 'Tom' Denning 1899-1989*, retain some vestige of the principles of common law for the common wo/man, it can serve to mitigate in the interests of those who through no fault of their own are moribund, as it were, with a party who may be described as a 'vexatious' on a good day.
Disclaimer: I am aware that my legal genes are not dissimilar to those of a bull mastiff which is why I don't post in a certain section of this site. Even so, I rarely advise throwing caution to the wind but in your particular case I see due cause for needs must when the devil drives.
*One particular judgement of Baron Denning may resonate for others as it does for me: 'What is the argument on the other side? Only this; that no other case has been found in which this has been done before. That argument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything that has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand while the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both'.