The appellant who is the complainant in a petition filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed this appeal against the acquittal of the respondent/accused under section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. His case was that the accused persons had borrowed Rs.3,00,000/= from him for the purpose of first respondent M/s. Walson Laboratories, Kozhikode and the second respondent issued a cheque dated 26.7.1993 towards the liability. The second respondent is the managing partner. Respondents 3 and 4 are the partners of the registered firm. The cheque was signed by the second respondent. Since there was no sufficient money in the account of the second respondent, the cheque was dishonoured and he approached the court. The Magistrate's Court after considering the evidence found that the complainant failed to prove that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt and also found that if a deemed date is taken as the date of service of statutory notice to the second respondent, the matter is time barred. Service of notice to the second accused as contended by the complainant was not proved. I have gone through the evidence. As regards