Locus standi and valid corporate authorisation determine maintainability when an appeal is filed by an alleged power of attorney holder.

An appeal was found not maintainable because the appellant did not disclose his status or establish authority to represent the company. Although he described himself as a power of attorney holder, the record did not show any connection with the company or authorisation to file the appeal. In the absence of proof of locus standi and valid representation, the challenge to maintainability succeeded and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was maintainable in the absence of disclosure of the appellant's status and authority to represent the company.

Analysis: The appellant described himself as a power of attorney holder, but the record did not disclose his connection with the company or any authorization by the company to institute the appeal. In the absence of proof of authority, the challenge to maintainability was upheld.

Conclusion: The appeal was held not maintainable for want of locus standi and proper authorization.

---