- (1.) Appellant has called in question the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India dated 11-4-1998 vide which he was punished by suspension from practice for one year with effect from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The circumstances which led to the filing of this appeal need a brief notice : Respondent is the complainant against the appellant - advocate. On 28-8-1991, he filed a complaint alleging that the appellant was doing "taxi business" and had at the relevant time four taxis in his ownership. It was alleged that since the appelllant was practising as a Lawyer, he could not have carried on the taxi business without the permission of the Bar Council and since no such permission had been obtained by him, he was guilty of committing professional misconduct. This complaint was filed initially with the State Bar Council but since it could not be disposed of within a period of one year from the date of the complaint, the same was transferred to the Bar Council of India under Section 36-B of the Advocates Act for its disposal. Before the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India, evidence was led on the issue viz. "whether respondent has committed the professional misconduct, as mentioned in the complaint -.
(2.) The evidence led on behalf of the complainant as well as that of the appellant shows that the appellant had himself enrolled as an Advocate with the Punjab and Haryana Bar Council in January, 1990. At the time when he so enrolled himself his family was doing taxi business and he himself also owned four taxis. The case of the appellant was that after his enrolment as an Advocate, he transferred all the taxis to different persons and handed over their possession to them and that he did not carry on with the "taxi business" thereafter. He filed copies of the affidavits by which transfers had been made by him in favour of different persons.
(3.) XX XX XX;