1. This is complainant's appeal against the judgment acquitting the accused for commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as “N.I. Act” for the sake of brevity). Respondent is the accused. Appellant and respondent will be referred by their original status before the trial Court.

2. Both the sides adduced evidence before the trial Court. Court refused to give benefit of legal presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act to the complainant. Trial Court finds accused successful in making out a probable defence. So, issue before this Court is whether the complainant has proved legal liability and whether trial Court has erred in appreciating the evidence.

3. I have heard Mrs. Ritu Jog, learned Counsel for complainant/appellant and Shri B.N. Mohta, learned Counsel for accused/respondent. With their assistance, I have gone through the record. The complainant and the accused are having different versions about liability covered by the cheque in question. The partnership firm between the complainant and the accused was dissolved and amount covered under the cheque represents the share of the complainant a