Company complaint authority must be proved by admissible evidence; matter remitted for fresh consideration on representation.

In a company prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the authority of the person signing or representing the complainant must be proved by admissible evidence. The court found that the photocopy of the authorisation letter had been only provisionally received, the alleged signatory was not examined, and proper proof was not adduced, so rejection of that document could not be faulted. However, because authorisation went to the competence of the complaint, the complainant was to be given an opportunity to prove it properly. The acquittal was set aside and the matter remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration on authorisation and representation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was liable to be dismissed for want of proof that the signatory had authority to represent the complainant company.

Analysis: The finding that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt was affirmed. The only surviving question was whether the photocopy of the authorisation letter could validly establish that PW1 was competent to prosecute the complaint on behalf of the company. The document was only provisionally received, the alleged signatory was not examined, and no proper mode of proof was adopted. On that basis, the rejection of the document could not be faulted. At the same time, the complainant should be afforded an opportunity to adduce proper evidence on the question of authorisation, since that issue went to the competence of the complaint.

Conclusion: The acquittal was set aside and the matter was remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration on the issue of authorisation and representation of the complainant company.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution by a company, authority of the person representing the complainant must be proved by admissible evidence, and where such proof has not been properly adduced, the matter may be remanded to enable the complainant to establish authorisation.

---