Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11.2 Towers D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K and L Towers D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K and L in the Signature View Apartments complex suffer from a significant amount of corrosion of reinforcement. This corrosion is due to a combined action of the high chloride content in the concrete, a faster than expected carbonation of concrete and a lower-than-expected strength of concrete. The significantly reduced cross-section of the reinforcement and cracking in concrete at many places due to this corrosion of the reinforcement, in addition to the lower than designed grade of concrete in the structures, makes these towers not safe for habitation. Given the high chloride content in the concrete almost throughout the structure and the large amount of deterioration that has already occurred, a repair of these structures for safe usage is unlikely to be technically and economically feasible.

40. Considering the various reports as aforesaid, it is apparent that the buildings in question are structurally unsafe. Repair works have been undertaken by the DDA, however, the same proved to be cosmetic, since the very structure of the building was found to be fundamentally weak. Wide and deep cracks have become palpably visible in beams and pillars of structure. The repair work carried out by the DDA could not prevent further corrosion. Rather, the problem aggravated over the years leading to building of cracks in columns, pillars, beams and ceilings, including the deep cracks on the outer facade leading to falling of ceilings and big lumps of concrete, endangering the life and property of the residents.

41. Thus, it is evident that the structures of the residential buildings in question are inherently weak, as sub-standard building materials have been used for construction. The IIT, Delhi has stated in clear terms that there is little to no chance of achieving desired life of the structures, even if preventive measures or repairs are undertaken. It has held that given the large amount of deterioration that has already occurred, repair of these structures for safe passage is unlikely to be technically and economically feasible. Its report finally recommended that the towers in question be vacated and dismantled, as soon as possible to prevent any loss of life.

63. Perusal of the aforesaid manifest that any construction/ re- construction can be done by the DDA, so long as it emanates from the DDA Act, the UBBL, 2016 and MPD-2021.

64. Reports placed on record clearly show that pillars of some of the buildings have developed wide deep cracks and the steel bars are rusted. Due to corrosion and rusting of steel bars, cracks have developed in the pillars of all the buildings, which are basic to the strength of the structure. The pillars are not in a condition or have the strength to take load of and support of the multi-storey building. The persistent threat to the life and well being of the residents of the Society has been highlighted irrefutably by the reports of the structural experts. Repairs works were undertaken by the DDA on many occasions. Yet, the buildings remained structurally unsafe. Accordingly, this Court finds no error in the decision of the DDA and the MCD, to declare the structures as dangerous and not fit for habitation, and to carry out reconstruction of the same, after demolition.