ORDER :

T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.

Rev.Aplw.(MD) No.21 of 2017 has been filed by the respondents 7 and 8 in W.P.(MD) No.8606 of 2010 filed by the first respondent in the review application seeking review of the order, dated 03.03.2017.

2. Cont.P.(MD) No.1109 of 2017 has been filed alleging that there is wilful disobedience of the order and direction issued in W.P.(MD) No.8606 of 2010, dated 03.03.2017 and the respondents have to be punished for such disobedience.

3. W.P.(MD) No.14847 of 2017 has been filed by a third party, who is not a party to the writ petition, review application and contempt petition, seeking to quash the proceedings of the District Registrar, dated 13.07.2017 and to forbear the District Registrar from conducting any enquiry against him.

4. W.P.(MD) No.16256 of 2017 has been filed by the very same petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.14847 of 2017 praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order dated 09.06.2017, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Trichy Corporation and to direct the respondents to accept the gift settlement deed made in favour of the respondent – Corporation.

5. The issue involved in these cases pertains to an unapproved housing layout and as to whether a road is in existence as claimed by the writ petitioner Murali Sundaram. The learned Writ Court, by order dated 03.03.2017, allowed the writ petition by issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus and quashing the notice issued by the respondent - Corporation in respect of the pathway comprised in New T.S.No.43 of Ward 42, Block AG15, Indian Bank Colony, Simco Meter Road, Tiruchirappalli Taluk and District, as being illegal and consequently, directing the official respondents to remove encroachments committed by the respondents 7 and 8, namely, Jothibai Kannan and R.V.Kannan, on the said street.

6. The said Jothibai Kannan and R.V.Kannan are the applicants in the review application. As mentioned above, Murali Sundaram has filed Cont.P.(MD) No.1109 of 2017 alleging disobedience of the order passed in the writ petition. The other two writ petitions have been filed by one S.M.Gajendran, who claims to be the original owner of the property, which was developed into a housing layout. The relief sought for in one of the writ petitions is to forbear the District Registrar from conducting any enquiry against him with regard to the Notice dated 13.07.2017, by which there was a proposal to cancel the Gift Settlement Deed registered as document No.6642 of 2015 and the relief sought for in the other writ petition is to quash the notice dated 09.06.2017 issued by the respondent – Corporation refusing to accept the Gift Settlement Deed.

7. Since Jothibai Kannan and R.V.Kannan have filed a review application to review the order passed in W.P.(MD) Nos.8606 of 2010, any order passed in the said review application would have direct bearing on the result of the contempt petition and the two writ petitions filed by S.M.Gajendran. Therefore, we take up the review application for consideration.

8. The first respondent/writ petitioner – Murali Sundaram contended that he had purchased Plot No.1, comprised in S.F.No.173/1A, measuring 2862 square feet by a registered Sale Deed dated 20.10.2005, registered as document No.4151 of 2005. It is his case that the plot purchased by him is situate immediately on the southern side of the road and the same vests with the respondent – Corporation. After purchase of the said land, he made arrangements for putting up construction and for which purpose, he obtained planning approval dated 19.10.2005, wherein also, the existence of the road is mentioned. Even in the survey proceedings, on the northern side of his property, the Corporation road is mentioned in T.S.No.43. According to the writ petitioner, the road runs east-west and connects Trichy Sathanur Main Road, which is situated on the further west of the property of the writ petitioner and that the writ petitioner and others have been using the road. On the northern side o