JUDGMENT ORDER Vijay Bishnoi, J. - The matter comes up for consideration of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 248 days in filing this criminal appeal. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent to oppose the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 2. Having considered the averments made in the application, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed. The delay of 248 days in fining this appeal is condoned. 3. The matter is finally heard. 4. This criminal leave to appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the judgment dated 07.04.2015 passed by the Special Judge (NI Act Cases) No. 2, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as the ''trial court'') in Regular Criminal Case No. 385/2012, whereby the trial court has dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the respondent-Puran Singh and acquitted him from the said offence. The trial court after taking into consideration the evidence produced by the appellant has observed that appellant has failed to prove that the notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act sent by him to the respondent was delivered to him. The trial court has also observed that there is difference between the address mentioned on notice Ex.-3 and the receipt of Postal Department (Ex.P-4) and, therefore, it creates doubt. Apart from that, the amount of cheque involved in the present case is only Rs. 5,000/- 5. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order passed by the trial court. Hence, the appeal preferred by the appellant is dismissed.