MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has allowed a book manufacturer to continue to operate from rented premises in a dilapidated building in Sewri, but at its own risk. In the event the building collapses, the landlord or the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) will not be held responsible for any loss of life or property, the court said. It added that the book manufacturer would be responsible if any loss or damage is suffered by third parties due to such an untoward incident.
Janata Book Manufacturing Depot had approached the court after the BMC disconnected water and electricity supply to the building, claiming that the ground-plus-one storey structure was “dangerously dilapidated”. The book manufacturer, which occupied the ground floor, contended that the action was high-handed and taken at the behest of the landlord to get the building vacated.
The petitioner informed the court that the property owner, Beauty Arts Dyers and Cleaners Pvt Ltd, had on February 23, 2025, received a notice from the BMC, instructing them to submit a structural stability report of the 60-year-old building.
The structural engineer appointed by the property owner to conduct a structural audit submitted its report on March 21, stating that the building was not structurally safe and stable, its structural condition had deteriorated beyond economic repair, and it could collapse any time. Therefore, the report said, the structure was not fit for human habitation and needed to be demolished after it was cleared of all its occupants.
Based on the report, the BMC declared the building to be dangerously dilapidated and therefore required to be demolished immediately, prompting the book manufacturer to approach the court, questioning the conclusion.
Apart from claiming that the procedure for declaring a building in C-1 category was not followed by the BMC, the petitioner contended that they had appointed a structural auditor, who had certified that the premises in use of the petitioner was “well maintained and none of the structural members likes columns, beams, slab and the ground floor show signs of any defect, stress, sagging or settlement”.
The petitioner’s structural auditor also added that the first floor, which was in occupation of the landlords, appeared to be neglected for lack of activity. The auditor added that the workers employed by the petitioner firm would work from the premises, despite the building being declared dilapidated.
The division bench of Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Arif Doctor, however, noted that the report submitted by the petitioner was based only on visual inspection of the premises, whereas the report submitted by the landlord to the BMC was based on scientific tests that are required to be conducted while assessing the structural stability of a building.
“We have on record an exhaustive report of the panel structural engineer which records serious findings on the ruinous condition of the building on the basis of scientific tests of different kinds. The report also encloses the photographs of important parts of the building which the court outrightly cannot overlook or discard,” said the bench.
Against this backdrop, the court said it would not be advisable to occupy the building, but if the building was occupied, “it shall be at the risk and consequences of those persons who intend to be in the premises, who shall not hold the municipal corporation or the landlord to be in any manner responsible for any civil or criminal consequences in the event of an untoward incident of a collapse. They shall also be responsible for any damage/loss whatsoever suffered by any third parties.”
The court has also granted liberty to the book manufacturer to engage a structural auditor and get a scientific audit of the building done and submit the report to the BMC. The civic body, in turn, is ordered to consider the reports in its Technical Advisory Committee and take further steps on catheterisation of the building.