Does Section 64A of the Abkari Act, impliedly, require a licencee under the Abkari Act and the Foreign Liquor Rules to obtain the consent of the owner of the premises for renewal of the license to run a Bar attached restaurant, where the licensee is not the owner of the premises? This is the question that has been posed for consideration in this case.

2. Petitioners, who are the owners of a building situated in Palarivattom, which had been leased out to the fourth respondent for conduct of a bar attached hotel, seeks a direction to the licencing authorities under the Abkari Act and the State to ensure that the renewal of FL3 licence is not done without obtaining a written consent of the landlords and also to cancel the renewal if the license has already been renewed. The contention has been raised with reference to Section 64A of the Abkari Act which, in certain circumstances, provides for the owner of a land, building or other premises to be prosecuted for an offence there under, if he permits any person to use such premises for the manufacture, sale or storage or sale of liquor, in contravention of the Act.

3. The case of the petitioners is that by a lease deed executed