- (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and Bar Council of India (for short, "B.C.I.").
(2.) By the impugned order, B.C.I. recorded a finding that the appellant had committed professional misconduct and suspended him from practising as an advocate before any Court or authority in India for a period of five years. While concluding the disciplinary proceeding cost of Rupees five thousand has been awarded against the appellant. It was directed that, in case the cost awarded is not paid within a period of one month, the period of suspension shall be extended for a further period of six months.
(3.) The sole respondent filed a complaint in the year 1984 before the Bar Council of Maharashtra (for short, "the State Bar Council") for taking disciplinary action against the appellant as, according to the complainant, appellant had committed professional misconduct. As the complaint could not be disposed of within the period of one year, as required under law, the same was transferred to the B.C.I. In view of the nature of the order that we propose to pass, it is not necessary to state respective cases of the parties. Suffice it to say that, on the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Disciplinary Committee of the B.C.I. : "1. Whether on 8th June, 1977, the respondent gave a threat to the petitioner as alleged OPC 2. Whether the respondent is guilty of preparing and drafting documents as alleged in Part No. 7 of the complaint to the detriment of the complainant and her family members OPC 3. Whether the respondent accepted the briefs from persons whose interest was in clash to the interest of the complainant and her family member and thereby caused loss of the damage to the complainant as alleged 4. Whether the respondent issued a false certificate regarding marketability of title with respect to the disputed property with a view to take illegal gains and thereby committed professional misconduct as alleged OPC 5. Whether the Respondent continued the said certificate to be used for illegal gains despite notice, if so to what effect OPC 6. Whether the respondent in collusion with Mr. Vora, the Architect and builder Mr. B.S. Jain committed illegal acts as alleged and as a result made personal gains and committed professional misconduct OPC 7. Whether the respondent helped the builder and the Architect in their unauthorised acts to cross wrongful acts to the complainant as alleged OPC 8. Whether the respondent is guilty of having committed professional or other misconduct as alleged vis-a-vis the complainant and her family members on the one hand and the Architect and the builder on the other hand OPC".;