JUDGMENT G. A. Sanap, J. - Heard learned Advocate for the parties. Perused the record and proceedings. 2. In this petition, the order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.8, Chandrapur, issuing process under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 is challenged. 3. It is undisputed that cheque amount was paid by the petitioners. However, the cheque amount was not paid within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the notice. The said fact, therefore, gave a cause of action in favour of the complainant. The complainant, therefore, filed complaint and the process came to be issued. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that his client is ready to pay Rs.10,000/-, as a compensation, over and above the payment of cheque amount. It is to be noted that the complainant is not ready for this. The complainant intends to prosecute his complaint. It is apparent on the face of the record that the order of issuance of process cannot be said to be illegal order. Therefore, same cannot be quashed and set aside. 5. It is further apparent on the face of record that the settlement of the matter between the parties would be in the interest of both the parties. However, the complainant is not agreeable to accept Rs.10,000/-, as a compensation. In the teeth of the provisions of law, the learned Magistrate would be required to decide the matter on merit. However, the fact remains that the learned Magistrate would be required to take the above facts into consideration while deciding the matter. 6. With this, I conclude that there is no substance in the petition. The petition stands dismissed. 7. In view of the nature of the issue involved in the matter, the learned Magistrate is requested to dispose of the Summary Criminal Complaint Case No. 1988 of 2019, within three months from the date of receipt of the order. 8. Rule stands discharged.