https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450093 The Bombay High Court held that a complainant company's witness was duly authorised where the affidavit asserted his role as Chairman and authorised representative, the board resolution and minutes book supported that assertion, and no timely objection was taken to the mode of proving those documents. It further held that the trial court acted hyper-technically in insisting on the original minutes book and that the evidentiary record, including unchallenged service and liability findings, supported interference with the acquittal. On that basis, the acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was reversed and conviction followed. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Feb 2024 19:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450093 The Bombay High Court held that a complainant company's witness was duly authorised where the affidavit asserted his role as Chairman and authorised representative, the board resolution and minutes book supported that assertion, and no timely objection was taken to the mode of proving those documents. It further held that the trial court acted hyper-technically in insisting on the original minutes book and that the evidentiary record, including unchallenged service and liability findings, supported interference with the acquittal. On that basis, the acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was reversed and conviction followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450093