M. VENUGOPAL, J.

1. The Petitioner / Party-in-Person has preferred the instant Contempt Petition praying for passing of an order by this Court to punish the Respondents in willfully, knowingly and deliberately disobeying the Judgment dated 19.02.2016 in W.A.No.188 of 2016 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court.

2. Heard the Petitioner on the 'Maintainability of the present Writ Petition'.

Petitioner's Pleas:

3. According to the Petitioner, in W.A.No.188 of 2016 dated 19.02.2016 the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had directed the Revenue Authorities not to interfere until title is settled by the Civil and Appellate Courts and further that the present Contempt Petition is filed against the Assistant Executive Engineer of Zone-8 and Junior Engineer of Division No.95 in Corporation of Chennai and the Tahsildar, Ayanavaram Taluk, Chennai - 23 and the Police Officers of Villivakkam, Chennai - 49 have disobeyed and committed contempt as regards the Hon'ble Division Bench orders / directions issued therein:

“1. W.P.No.38555 of 2015 dated 22.02.2016

2. W.A.No.188 of 2016 dated 19.02.2016

3. Crl.O.P.No.22443 of 2015 and 4403 of 2016 dated 29.02.2016

4. The Letter of the Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9 in Lr.No.1764/6(1)/2016-3 dated 30.03.2016.”

4. It is the stand of Petitioner that the 3rd Respondent had committed Contempt in regard to the Hon'ble Division Bench order in W.P.No.17058 of 2016 dated 10.11.2016 and further had given wrong and erroneous information to the Court. In fact the 3rd Respondent never submitted any Application before C.M.D.A. or Corporation of Chennai Authority and that she has no title deed and also not having Patta in regard to the disputed property in T.S No.24, Block No.61, Konnur Village, Chennai - 49. As a matter of fact, the 3rd Respondent had stated that the area belongs to Tambaram Taluk and Tiruvallur District and she also gave a wrong Door Number.

5. That apart, it is represented by the Petitioner that the 3rd Respondent's building is on the road land extent and set-backs were not provided and also constructed ground and three floors and the same is an illegal and unlawful one because of the reason that the building is an unauthorised one.

6. Continuing further, the Petitioner points out before this Court the fact that the police officials, Villivakkam, Chennai had not registered a First Information Report against the 3rd Respondent, who has no title deed much less a Parent Deed. In reality, the said property belongs to one Muniammal and there is no passage at all. Apart from that, despite the direction issued by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.22443 of 2015 dated 29.02.2016, the Villivakkam Police, Chennai - 49 had not registered the First Information Report.

7. The Petitioner proceeds to point out that the 3rd Respondent with a malicious and fraudulent intention filed O.S.No.1287 of 1986 and that in compromise memo, an order was passed on 04.04.1989. In this connection, the grievance of the Petitioner is that the trial and the Appellate Court by not taking into consideration of the memo in a proper perspective had ordered for his arrest and his sisters and further that for an illegal and unauthorised construction, both the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court are responsible.

8. Added further, the Petitioner projects an argument that he along with his four unmarried sisters have an 'Easementary Right' to the road (through the passage length of 57 feet and passage width of 3 feet and 9 inches on the eastern side and 5 feet 6 inches on the western side), which was not appreciated by the trial Court in I.A.No.2183 of 2015, I.A.No.15611 of 2015 in O.S.No.6407 of 2014 as well as the Appellate Court in CMP No.52 of 2015 in CMA No.92 of 2015.

9. The Petitioner proceeds to take a plea that the 3rd Respondent has put up an illegal, unlawful, unauthorised construction in the Ground Floor, 1st Floor, 2nd Floor and 3rd Floor and to murder his family members