ORDER : N. Anand Venkatesh, J. This writ petition has been filed challenging the unilateral cancellation of the registered settlement deed dated 08.04.2005 and the subsequent documents that were executed in favour of the private respondents and for removal of entries made in the Encumbrance Certificate. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 22.04.2025, this Court found that the notice has been effected on the private respondents and there was no appearance on the side of the private respondents and hence, this Court directed the names of respondents 3 to 10 to be printed in the cause list. Accordingly, the names of R3 to R10 have been printed in the cause list and there is no appearance either in person or through counsel. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1 and 2. 4. The case of the petitioner is that the subject property belonged to the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board and it was sold in favour of Mrs.Kamatchi through a sale deed dated 11.02.2005 registered as Document No.1375 of 2025 on the file of the second respondent. The said Kamatchi executed a settlement deed dated 08.04.2005 in favour of her son Thiruvenkadam, which was registered as Document No.1376 of 2025 on the file of the second respondent. The said Thiruvenkadam had borrowed loan from one Selvaraj and the property was given as the security. Since the amount was not repaid, the said Selvaraj filed a suit in O.S.No.1397 of 2021 against the respondents 3 to 6, who are legalheirs of Thiruvenkadam. The said suit was decreed by judgment and decree dated 13.08.2021. The decree amount was not paid and hence, execution proceedings were initiated by the said Selvaraj in E.P.No.4600 of 2021.During the execution proceedings, the property was brought for auction sale and the petitioner participated in the auction and he was declared as successful bidder. The sale certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner dated 04.01.2025 and the same was also registered as Document No.834 of 2025 on the file of the second respondent. 5. In the meantime, it seems that the settlement deed dated 08.04.2005 was unilaterally cancelled and subsequent settlement deed was executed by the said Kamatchi in favour of Sivagami and three others, who are respondents 7 to 10. 5. In the meantime, it seems that the settlement deed dated 08.04.2005 was unilaterally cancelled and subsequent settlement deed was executed by the said Kamatchi in favour of Sivagami and three others, who are respondents 7 to 10. Aggrieved by the cancellation deed unilaterally cancelling the settlement deed and also the subsequent settlement deed executed in favour of respondents 7 to 10 was registered and entered in the Encumbrance Certificate, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for necessary relief. 6. Unilateral cancellation of the settlement deed dated 08.04.2005 is illegal and the law has been settled by the Full Bench of this Court in in Sasikala Vs Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Sub- Collector reported in 2022 (5) CTC 257 Hence, the subsequent settlement deed that was executed in favour of the respondents 7 to 10 must also fail. That apart, the property has been purchased by the petitioner in auction and the sale certificate has also been registered as Document No.834 of 2025. This registration of sale certificate will automatically reverse the earlier entries that were made while entertaining the cancellation deed dated 23.01.2006 registered as Document No.193 of 2006 and subsequent settlement deed dated 01.12.2008 registered as Document No. 4113 of 2008. 7. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to make necessary entries in the encumbrance register by reversing the entries made while registering Document Nos.193 of 2006 and 4113 of 2008. This process shall be completed by the second respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.