Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard learned counsel for petitioner. None has appeared on behalf respondents 3 and 4 though name of Sri B.B. Paul has been shown in the cause list.

2. Petitioner-landlord filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent on the ground of default in payment of rent as also subletting. The Trial Court dismissed suit holding that there was no default in payment of rent. It also found that there was no sublet. In the revision preferred by petitioner, Revisional Court found that there was a default in payment of rent. It also held that there was no compliance of Section 20 (4) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1972”) so as to protect the petitioner from decree of eviction. However, Revisional Court dismissed suit on the ground that there was no valid notice served by petitioner upon the tenant inasmuch respondent-tenant Luchi Ram Agarwal had died but the notices were not served upon all legal heirs of the deceased tenant.

3. It is contended that after death of original tenant, all the legal heirs constitute joint tenancy. If the notice has been served even upon one of the legal