TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1395
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emises in question". 4. The Appellant states that the premises in question is comprised of 3 three-storied interlinked structures, constructed by the predecessors-in-interest of the Appellant in 1930. The first structure has 6 rooms, the second structure has 10 rooms and the third structure has 9 rooms. There were about 24 tenants at the premises in question, including the Respondent No. 1. 5. It is the case of the Appellant that the impugned order has been passed, overlooking the submission of the Respondent-Municipal Corporation with regard to the precarious condition of the premises in question, the report dated 15.05.2015 of the Technical Advisory Committee to whom the Respondent-Municipal Corporation had made a reference, and the Structural Audit Report prepared by M/s. Manohar Ashatavadhani & Associate opining that the building is in a critical and dangerous situation in C-1 category. 6. Buildings in Mumbai in need of repair are classified into C1, C2-A, C2-B and C3 categories having regard to their condition. Category C1 buildings are those which require immediate evacuation and demolition, Category C2-A buildings are also required to be evacuated. Category C-2A bui....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court refused to grant stay of demolition. 13. On or about 08.04.2015, the Respondent No. 1 challenged the order of the City Civil Court in the High Court by filing an appeal. The appeal was rejected. 14. Thereafter, on or about 15.05.2015, the Respondent-Municipal Corporation referred the matter before the Technical Advisory Committee as there were contrary reports. The Technical Advisory Committee went through the different Structural Audit Reports and thereafter opined that the building was temporarily repairable. 15. The Respondent No. 1 and other tenants thereafter gave a certificate of stability dated 13.11.2015 by M/s. Crown Consultants, stating that the structure was safe for the next five years, subject to annual civil and structural maintenance work. Over five years have already elapsed since the date of issuance of the Certificate. 16. On 25.01.2019, the Respondent-Municipal Corporation issued a notice to the Appellant Under Section 353(B) of the Municipal Corporation Act calling upon the Appellant to get the building examined by a Licensed Structural Engineer. 17. On 19.02.2019, M/s. Manohar Ashtavadhani & Associates submitted a report stating that Struct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f adjoining wall with the assistance of M/s. Shetgiri and Associates, Architects, at his own risk and costs. The said work was however to be carried out in the presence of the officials of Corporation. 24. In our considered view, the High Court has committed a serious error in directing removal of a wall with the assistance of M/s. Shetgiri and Associates, when there were conflicting reports including an earlier report of the Technical Advisory Committee on the basis of the opinions of other Architects, declaring the building to be of the C-1 category. 25. Even the Report of Shetgiri and Associates, relied upon by the Respondent No. 1, provided: "13. Brief Description of Repairs to be done: (c) External Plaster External Plaster & Structural repairs: External Plaster to be replaced with new plaster. (d) Structural Repairs Structural Repairs: Damaged Structural members like load bearing walls and its plaster, brick pillars, beams and slabs, where ever exists, should be strengthened and its repairs should be carried out immediately. The said structural repairs should be carried out as per the direction and u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved. 5) It is requested that the concerned authority must carry out regular maintenance of the structures, sewer lines & premises to avoid any further severe damage to the structure at a later stage. 6) ........ 7) It is extremely important to add here that the structure is almost more than 45 years old and has majorly outlived its economic life. In olden days, especially in 1900's, the Indian Standard codes were basic in nature as compared with what is adopted in the present time. Even if the decision of restoration is adopted, uplifting the structure to an extent that it would be at part with modern structure's in terms of the strength, design & safety standards and also the I.S codal provisions especially seismic and wind analysis would be practically ruled-out and possible only if entire structural upliftment is carried out within each and every corner of the structure, which is extremely difficult in case of repair works considering the massive repairs cost involved. Moreover, the foundations of the structure cannot be restored. 8) ........ 9) The report is only limited to the captioned suit building and no other Flat/s, bui....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ternate accommodation and undertaking to vacate the subject premises. E) In view of the aforesaid, Respondent No. 1 should immediately hand over the possession of its subject house to the Petitioner so that the MCGM can demolish the subject property and Petitioner can start the process of redevelopment of the subject property. F) I as the owner of the subject property assure and undertake as under: 1. that I am accepting Respondent No. 1 as a legal tenant. 2. I undertake that "Subject Property" will be redeveloped after all the tenants have been evicted from their rooms. I undertake that I will try to complete the redevelopment work of the new building to be constructed on the Subject Property within 2 years from the date of receipt of the Commencement Certificate for redevelopment. However, in the event, if I could not complete the project within 2 years because of the natural calamities or the reasons beyond the control of the Petitioner, in that event, I undertake to pay rent/transit accommodation as per the choice of the Respondent No. 1 till the project the completed and competition certificate is issued by the appropriate authority. ....