https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299867 Leave to appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint was declined because no perversity, misreading of evidence, or material error in the trial court's appreciation of evidence was shown. The trial court had found that the complainant failed to prove proper authorisation of the person pursuing the case, that supporting documents were not duly proved, and that no account statement or comparable reliable material established the alleged liability. The cheque liability was also viewed as doubtful in light of the defence that the vehicle had been repossessed and the cheque was only a security instrument. In an acquittal appeal, interference is warranted only on a clear legal or evidentiary defect, which was absent here. en-us Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Jan 2022 12:19:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299867 Leave to appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint was declined because no perversity, misreading of evidence, or material error in the trial court's appreciation of evidence was shown. The trial court had found that the complainant failed to prove proper authorisation of the person pursuing the case, that supporting documents were not duly proved, and that no account statement or comparable reliable material established the alleged liability. The cheque liability was also viewed as doubtful in light of the defence that the vehicle had been repossessed and the cheque was only a security instrument. In an acquittal appeal, interference is warranted only on a clear legal or evidentiary defect, which was absent here. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299867