Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. This petition was taken up during vacation by Division Bench for interim relief. The Bench passed an order on 16th May, 2019. Relevant portion of which reads as under:-

"5. In view of the aforesaid situation wherein the interim order passed by this Court overarches the subject structure i.e. 'Vapra Priya Soparkar 3 39 wpl 4162-18 with nmw 210-19-o Chawl Building' and allegedly prevents even the demolition of the adjoining buildings and there is an imminent risk of loss of life and property, in the event the buildings collapse, we were anxious to find out a workable solution to the situation. When the matter was listed on 13th May, 2019, we had put the Counsel for the Petitioners on notice that to take care of the apprehension of the MHADA and SBUT, we may need to clarify the extent of risk which the Petitioners carry on account of the restraint order. The matter was, thus, posted on 15th May, 2019 to facilitate the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, to take instructions and make submissions. On 15 th May, 2019, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, after arguing for sometime, submitted that the Petitioners would file an undertaking spelling out the risk which the Petitioners would undertake in the event of loss of life, limb and property due to the restraint order. Thus, the matter came to be posted today.
6. Today, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners has tendered an Affidavit. Though a submission is made there into the effect that if any damage is caused to 'Vapra Chawl Building' while demolishing the adjoining buildings i.e.'Furniturewala Building' and 'Khatija Building', the Petitioners shall not hold SBUT contractor or MHADA responsible for the said damages, yet, the said undertaking is qualified by a number of caveats and conditions. We find it difficult to pass an order on the basis of such conditional and qualified Affidavitcumundertaking.
8. We further make it clear that, till the next date of hearing, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and Saifee Burhani Upliftment Trust(SBUT) shall not undertake demolition of the other two buildings namely 'Furniturewala Building' and 'Khatija Building'.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the petitioners are now not averse to all floors of Vapra chawl excluding the ground floor being pull down. He submitted that even if complete demolition of the adjacent two buildings is carried out, the ground floor of Vapra Chawl can still stand alone.