1. This appeal has been filed under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] by N.K. Jagannivasa Rao, appellant, who is enrolled as an Advocate with the Karnataka Bar Council. Action has been taken against the appellant for misconduct under Section 35 of the Act on the basis of a complaint made by the respondent, N. Shivananda Rao, wherein it was stated that by misstating that his income was less than Rs. 10,000 per month the appellant had obtained stipend of Rs. 500 per month from the Government of Karnataka. The Karnataka Bar Council found that the said allegation in the complaint was established and directed that the appellant be suspended from practising as an Advocate for a period of six months. On appeal, the Bar Council of India, by the impugned judgment, has reduced the punishment imposed on the appellant to reprimand. We have heard Shri Mukul Mudgal, the learned Counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal. We do not find any ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the Karnataka Bar Council as well as the Bar Council of India that the appellant made a false statement about his income and on the basis of such false statement he obtained stipend of Rs. 500 per month from the Government of Karnataka. The said conduct of the appellant in obtaining stipend by making a false statement about his income constitutes misconduct and action could be taken against him for such misconduct under Section 35 of the Act. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.