Leach, C.J.

1. The respondent is an advocate of this Court. Seven charges of professional misconduct have been framed against him. They have been investigated by the District Judge of Tinnevelly, who has held that five of them, have not been substantiated but that two of them have been proved. The report of the District Judge now comes up for consideration by this Court. We agree with the District Judge that the five charges which he has decided in favour of the respondent have not been proved, but we disagree with him with his findings on the other two charges. On these charges we consider that the respondent is also entitled to a decision in his favour.

2. The petition on which these proceedings were instituted was filed by Thayumanasundarathammal, the widow of one Sankara Gomathi Chettiar, a merchant of Tuticorin. Sankara Gomathi Chettiar died on 28th July 1927 when his wife was 23 years of age. By her he had three children, the eldest of whom was a boy named Muthiah. Sankara Gomathi Chettiar left certain properties, but according to the report he was, at the time of his death, in embarrassed circumstances. At all material time the respondent practised at Tuticorin and bet