(1) In this case the landlord let out premises constructed on plot taken on lease from President of India to the Union of India for housing a post office and the Land and Development Officer had expressly given his consent on behalf of the President of India for use of the building fora post office, the landlord's suit for eviction against Union of India under C.(K) was not maintainable. The fact that the deed of lease prohibited use of building for any purpose other than that of residence was immaterial.
(2) The tenant is to be evicted under Clause (k) only when he uses the premises in a manner contrary to the conditions imposed on the landlord by the Government or the authorities mentioned in the clause while giving him a lease of the land and where he does not stop the misuse within such time as is specified by the controller in this behalf. When the Govt. itself is the tenant and the Govt. is a consenting party, the rent deed executed for and on behalf of the President of India by which the premises were taken for post office amounts to consent. The unity of the tenant and the Govt. in one person namely, the President of India, is a complete answer to the landlord's case of breach. Cl.(k) thereforee is not attracted.
(3) The consent of the Land and Development Officer is not only a condensation of breaches in the past but is an express permission for the use of the house in future for a purpose other than residence, but only so long as it remains in the tenancy of the post office, for and on behalf of the President of India.