( 1 ) HEARD the petitioners counsel as well as Sri Shakti Swaroop Nigam for the respondents.

( 2 ) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of the Additional District judge dated 1. 7. 81 whereby petitioners suit for ejectment and mesne profit has been dismissed.

( 3 ) UNDISPUTEDLY petitioner filed suit for rent and ejectment after serving a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act on respondent No. 3 whereby her tenancy was terminated. The trial court decreed the suit for rent as well as for ejectment. The revisional court, however, set aside the judgment of the lower court so far as it related to the decree of ejectment.

( 4 ) THE only point for consideration in this writ petition is whether the notice under Section 106, transfer of Property Act served by the petitioner on the respondents was a valid notice. The revisional court has taken the view that since it was admitted to the petitioner-landlord himself that during the life time of his mother, he (plaintiff) realized rent from the defendant/tenant on behalf of his mother and after her death, he realized the rent for himself as well as for his brothers and sisters,