Judgment :- This revision has been preferred against the judgment in C.A.No.15 of 2002 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai. The first appeal has arisen out of the judgment in C.C.No.6665/1998 on the file of the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, in which the complainant had preferred a private complaint for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which ended in conviction against the accused. The appeal preferred against the Judgment of the learned trial judge in C.A.No.15 of 2002 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai also ended in dismissal, which necessitated the accused to prefer this revision. 2. Since there was no representation for the appellant on yesterday (12.04.2007), the revision is posted today "for dismissal". Even today there is no representation for the revision petitioner. The findings of the Courts below are concurrent in nature and there is no point to keep the revision pending in the absence of any representation for the revision petitioner. Hence, the revision is dismissed for non-prosecution. The trial Court is directed to secure the accused to serve the unexpended portion of the sentence.