Judgment : Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. It appears that the complainant which is a Private Limited Company has lodged complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, on the ground that the cheque drawn in favour of the appellant-Company by the accused for sum of Rs. 2,38,861/- was dishonoured due to “insufficient funds”. Thereafter, demand notice was served by R.P.A.D. as well as under postal certificate and since the accused failed to make payment as demanded, the complaint was lodged. The complainant was represented by one Rajesh Bhagchand Rathi and the Company had also engaged an Advocate to prosecute the complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 1, Amravati. On the date of hearing i.e. 29/8/2005, Mr. Rathi and Advocate for the complainant were absent and, therefore, the complaint was dismissed by J.M.F.C., Amravati. 3. Learned Advocate for the complainant submitted that complainant be given an opportunity of hearing on merits since the complaint was not decided on merit due to absence of Mr. Rathi and Advocate engaged by complainant and which was not continued absence from the trial Court. 4. Under these circumstances, in the interest of justice, an opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the complainant to contest the complaint on merits and I am inclined to allow the appeal provided that the appellant shall deposit costs of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) in trial Court which will be payable to the accused as condition precedent for contesting the complaint in the trial Court. The impugned order is accordingly set aside with direction to the learned trial Magistrate to give an opportunity of hearing to the complainant and hear the case on merits in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed accordingly. The parties to appear before the learned trial Court on 19th March, 2012. The complainant to communicate this order to the accused on his postal address through R.P.A.D. and under postal certificate.