Allahabad High Court Slams Ghaziabad Judge Over “Judicial Misconduct” in Property Dispute

## Allahabad High Court Slams Ghaziabad Judge Over “Judicial Misconduct” in Property Dispute

In a scathing indictment, the Allahabad High Court has recommended administrative action against a Ghaziabad civil court judge, citing “deliberate judicial misconduct” and “daylight judicial murder” in a property dispute case. This case underscores the critical importance of due diligence in property matters and judicial integrity, a topic frequently discussed at www.landlawacr.com.

The controversy arose when Indra Mohan Sachdev sought to register his name as owner of a property in Anand Industrial Area, relying on an ex-parte decree from 2022. However, Justice Sandeep Jain of the High Court uncovered serious irregularities. Crucially, the trial court had disregarded the death certificate of the original owner, Sushila Mehra, who passed away in 1996 – long before the suit was even filed. The Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam rightly argued that the decree obtained against a deceased person was a legal nullity.

The High Court found the trial judge’s reasoning “deeply flawed,” stating, “The conduct of the trial Judge is not above board, who has either due to extraneous reasons or due to lack of competence, has passed the impugned decree…” The Court emphasized that a photocopy of a death certificate, especially one already used in Delhi High Court proceedings, should not have been dismissed, particularly when presented by a neutral third party like the Nagar Nigam.

Further examination of municipal records revealed the property as “Muraga Khana” with no clear ownership details, reinforcing the High Court’s stance that mutation requires established predecessor ownership. The bench firmly reiterated fundamental land law principles: payment of house tax or municipal dues does not confer ownership rights, and critically, a tenant cannot claim ownership through adverse possession against their landlord.

Consequently, the High Court termed the Ghaziabad civil court’s May 13, 2025 order “legally unsustainable” and set it aside, sending a clear message about judicial accountability and the unwavering principles of property law.