The Advocate appellant could not be treated as gross negligent but was only one of negligence.

Supreme Court in the case of T.A. Kathiru Kunju v. Jacob Mathai & Anr.
[Civil Appeal No.3860 of 2007] wherein the respondent had lodged a complaint
before the Bar Council that he had engaged appellant as an Advocate to file a case
under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for bouncing of a cheque, but instead of
filing such a complaint, the appellant felt it apposite to file a complaint case under
Section 420 IPC, and also did not return the cheque to the respondent; the
Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India had found the appellantAdvocate
guilty of gross negligence in discharge of his professional service to the
respondent. While setting aside the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar
Council of India, it was held that the act of the appellant could not be treated to be in
the realm of gross negligence and was only one of negligence.[On 16th February, 2017]