Judgment

S.B. Majmudar, J.-The appellant who is a practising Advocate has brought in challenge the order passed by the Bar Council of India under the provisions of Advocates Act, 1961 holding him guilty of professional misconduct and ordering his suspension from practice for a period of two years.

2. A few facts leading to this appeal deserve to be noted.

3. One G. Rami Reddy had filed a suit against the respondent-complainant, G. Lingappa and another being O.S. No. 173 of 1983 on the file of Assistant Civil Judge City Civil Court, Hyderabad for dissolu­tion of partnership. In the suit, the appellant represented the oppo­nent of the present respondent-complainant. In the suit, the parties negotiated for compromise. As per the terms of agreement dated 2.7.1984 a compromise memo was filed in the Court. On the day of compromise, the complainant however was paid an amount of Rs. 12,000/- cash though he had to receive Rs. 3,000/- more meaning Rs. 15,000/-. It is the case of the complainant-respondent before the Bar Council of the State of Andhra Pradesh that after the said compromise was entered into, the appellant-Advocate for the other side called him for a cup of tea in the canteen and