Prayagraj, March 2 -- Terming a trial judge's act as "deliberate judicial misconduct," the Allahabad high court has directed action against him for "deliberately" ignoring a death certificate while deciding a case related to disputed property. The high court said the civil judge deliberately ignored the death certificate to enable the plaintiff (the person who filed the suit) to make illegal gains. Allowing the first appeal filed by the Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam, Justice Sandeep Jain, in an order dated February 24, set aside the judgment and decree dated May 13, 2025 by which the civil judge (senior division), Ghaziabad, had directed the Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam to record a plaintiff's name as the owner of a property based on an earlier ex parte decree. The high court found that the foundational decree was a nullity as it was passed against a deceased person. Furthermore, the high court directed the matter to be placed before the chief justice of the Allahabad high court for administrative action against the trial judge, characterising the lower court's order as a case of "deliberate judicial misconduct" and "daylight judicial murder." The high court rejected the trial court's reasoning that the death certificate was inadmissible because it was a photocopy. Justice Jain remarked, "The reason assigned by the trial court for ignoring the death certificate of Sushila Mehra is shocking, perverse and tainted with extraneous considerations. The trial court purposely in order to cause illegal gain to the plaintiff has ignored it." Regarding the claim of adverse possession by a tenant, the high court held that once a person enters a property as a tenant, they are bound to hand over vacant possession to the landlord and cannot deny the landlord's title. The high court further clarified that mutation entries in revenue or municipal records do not confer title, citing the case of P.Kishore Kumar vs. Vittal K. Patkar (2024). The high court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned (under challenge) judgment and decree dated May 13, 2025, dismissing the original suit with costs. In a scathing indictment of the trial judge's conduct, the high court observed, "The conduct of the trial judge is not above board. It is a case of deliberate judicial misconduct, which renders the integrity of the judge doubtful. This is a case which shocks the conscience of this court. It is a case of daylight judicial murder."...