https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326172 A liquor licence issued on an application made by one person remained vested in that applicant, and an alleged later partnership deed could not create an independent enforceable right for private respondents, especially where the deed referred to a different business name and the firm was unregistered. The court noted that mere affixing of photographs did not make the respondents co-applicants or partners in the original licence application, and Section 69 of the Partnership Act barred their claim. It also held that the Excise and Taxation Officer acted without jurisdiction in sending a restraining letter to the police on the basis of their complaint, making the communication an unjustified interference with the licensed business. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Apr 2016 23:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326172 A liquor licence issued on an application made by one person remained vested in that applicant, and an alleged later partnership deed could not create an independent enforceable right for private respondents, especially where the deed referred to a different business name and the firm was unregistered. The court noted that mere affixing of photographs did not make the respondents co-applicants or partners in the original licence application, and Section 69 of the Partnership Act barred their claim. It also held that the Excise and Taxation Officer acted without jurisdiction in sending a restraining letter to the police on the basis of their complaint, making the communication an unjustified interference with the licensed business. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326172