https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339256 Mere negligence or error of judgment by an advocate does not constitute professional misconduct; disciplinary liability requires gross negligence involving an element of moral delinquency. The Court also reiterated that such findings must rest on convincing preponderance of evidence. On the facts, the only lapse was the absence of acknowledgment for return of the client's cheque, and there was no clear finding that it was improperly retained or that the explanation of delivery to police was disproved. The conduct was therefore held not to amount to gross negligence or professional misconduct, and the disciplinary order was set aside. en-us Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Feb 2017 05:51:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339256 Mere negligence or error of judgment by an advocate does not constitute professional misconduct; disciplinary liability requires gross negligence involving an element of moral delinquency. The Court also reiterated that such findings must rest on convincing preponderance of evidence. On the facts, the only lapse was the absence of acknowledgment for return of the client's cheque, and there was no clear finding that it was improperly retained or that the explanation of delivery to police was disproved. The conduct was therefore held not to amount to gross negligence or professional misconduct, and the disciplinary order was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339256