JUDGMENT

This is an appeal filed challenging the order dated 30.05.2014 in C.C.No.3465/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy dismissing a complaint filed by the appellant alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the 1^st respondent for default and through which the accused was acquitted under Section 256(1) of the Cr.P.C.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the 1^st respondent had agreed to settle the matter and that is the only reason why the appellant had not adduced evidence before the Court. It is submitted that since the matter was not settled, no withdrawal petition was also filed by the appellant. It is submitted that the appellant had failed to appear only on account of the fact that the 1^st respondent / accused had agreed to settle the matter. It is submitted that failure to appear may be condoned and the complaint may be restored to the file of the trial court for adjudication on merits. Despite service of notice, there is no appearance for the 1^st respondent.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and having perused the impugned order, I am of th