1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the order dated 02.04.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Coimbatore in C.C. No. 779 of 2004.

2. Before the trial Court, the appellant herein has filed a private complaint against the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. The learned Magistrate, after taking the complaint on file in C.C. No. 779 of 2004 and after issuance of summons to the accused, examined the witnesses. To prove his case, the complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and 14 documents were marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.14. On behalf of the accused, 6 witnesses were examined and Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.23 were marked.

4. After having recorded the evidences and considering the depositions and evidences put forth by both sides, the learned Magistrate has come to a conclusion that the respondent herein is not found guilty for the offence arose in the Private complaint and acquitted the respondent. Against which, the appellant has filed the present appeal before this Court.

5. On going through the complaint and documents filed by the appellant before the trial Court, the case of the appellant was projected as follows:

The respondent was running a Finance Company in the premises owned by him. On considering the request made by the respondent, the appellant and his friends handed over Rs. 40 lakhs to the respondent on several occasions. Due to the dispute arose in the transaction, the appellant lodged a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Coimbatore, for taking necessary action against the respondent. The said complaint filed by the appellant was forwarded to the Inspector of Police, C.C.B., Coimbatore, with a direction to investigate the case. Subsequent to the orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Coimbatore, the Sub Inspector of Police, C.C.B., Coimbatore, registered a case against the respondent herein in Crime No. 24 of 2003 for the offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC. After registration of the case, the respondent approached the complainant and requested to settle the matter amicably. Thereafter, on 26.11.2003, a Memorandum Of Understanding has been executed between the appellant and the respondent. Based on the same, the respondent issued a Cheque for a sum of Rs.11 lakhs on 11.02.2004. The said Memorandum of Understanding and the said cheque was marked as Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.3. When the cheque was presented in Lakshmi Vilas Bank, R.S.Puram Branch, Coimbatore, for collection, it was returned on 12.02.2004 for insufficient funds. The said Return Memo and the Debit Advice has been marked as Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.5. After returning the cheque, the appellant sent a statutory notice to the respondent on 09.03.2004, in which, he requested the respondent to pay the entire cheque amount within a period of 15 days. The said statutory notice marked as Ex.P.6 was received by the respondent on 10.03.2004. After receiving the said notice, on 12.03.2004, he sent a reply notice, in which, he denied the liability as well as the issuance of the said Cheque. The Acknowledgment Cards with regard to receipt of the statutory notice and the reply notice issued by the respondent has been marked as Ex.P.7 and Ex.P.8.

6. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Coimbatore. After analyzing the evidence, the learned Magistrate has come to the conclusion that the respondent is not found guilty and finally, acquitted the respondent.

7. In order to substantiate his claim, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that as per Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the appellant complied with the conditions stipulated in the Act and lodged a complaint before the learned Magistrate. Further, he added that the witnesses examined on the side of the respondent does not say anything about the execution of Memorandum Of Understanding. Therefore, the evidence with regard to the execution of Memorandu