BMC notice to Saburi Building and Structural Audit Report 2013 Dec

04^thDecember, 2013

TO WHOM SO EVER IT MAY CONCERN

Sub:  STRUCTURAL AUDIT REPORT

Ref: The Building Known as ‘Saburi / Dias Building’ located atVakola Bridge, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 055

            The undersigned Mr. Kantilal Lalpuria of TOTAL SOLUTION visited and inspected the building referred above with respect to the present condition, the general state as well as the audit requirement.

            The existing structure of the said Buildingconsists of Load bearingand partly RCC Frame having ground plus1floor. The building was constructed in year 1942, thus building is about 71 years old. 

                  The structural condition of the building R.C.C & load bearing member is in a veryweak condition.All the columns ,beams& slabs are having very wide structuralunrepairable cracks at the base and damaged badly.Slabs are badly corroded due to leakages in surrounding areas .Beams above windows are having deflections in concrete due to that window stones are cracked in center and causing difficult to open the windows. Based on visual inspection, it is felt that the structure is unrepairable, dangerousand is in unsafe condition. Mishaps like instances of wall, ceiling and passage collapsesmay occurat any time.

The building is in poor condition due to lack of proper maintenanceand  old age .

At many place structural member have wide cracks with exposed reinforcement. Reinforcement members are exposed corroded, the area of reinforcement is significantly reduced due to excessive corrosion and some place it is broken.

External column has wide longitudinal cracks. At some place slab has cracks sound hollow. At some place wall plaster is in poor condition, heavy leakage / dampness in rooms, internal column are in poor condition.

Structural members have wide cracks; reinforcement is exposed and heavily corroded due to excessive corrosion

Vegetation growth is observed at many places on drainage pipesand  along drainage pipes which are leaking at junctions.

The plot is lower than existing road and is in low lying area compared to other new developments and other plots nearby (where earth filling is done to increase their ground level). In this plot water gets accumulated everywhere from adjoining plots and roads leading to structural deterioration and impede other electrical risk like short circuit etc.

The building isin a dangerous state due to water accumulation over the ground floor level which causes flooding. The moisture from the water stagnated for a long period have weakened the structures to such an extent that they have become inhabitable. This condition also arises because regular repairs are not conducted. These are needed as per the age of building. 

Audit aim is to caution members about conditions of building and ask them to vacate the premises, which is unrepairable and dangerous to stay in.

The building is in a ruinous condition, beyond repairs. As I am told, that for lastseveral years no major structural or civil and painting work was carried out though buildings need it.Major separations, structural, shrinkage cracks were found on external side of wall & external plaster of building. Most of locations plaster has washed away, fungus and plants are also has growth on dead walls and chajjas. Structural strength of concrete in column beams and slabs are found to be weak.

Internally we found that in most of roomsstructural members like column, beams slab, balcony and loft slabs are found in badly damaged condition.

We are enclosing herewith the Internal Survey report of all internal area, Staircases and terrace as well as External observations that need structural repairs as per our survey carried out on 27.11.2013in the said Building premises.          

Conclusion

·         Looking to the condition of the building and visible major cracks and poor maintenance of the building it has become unsafe for human habitation.

·         At this stage, structural repairing will not add substantial strength to the structure in its balance serviceable life.

·         The repairing will not stop further deterioration process entirely.

·         The balance serviceable life is unpredictable even after carrying out major structural repairs.

 

 

We advice

The repairing and further maintenance cost may prove disproportional with respect to balance service life.  Thus we believe going into redevelopment of property is the best choice as repairs will be a very costly affair and a periodic one.

           

Looking to the condition of load bearing & partly RCC frame structure and foundations of  the building it can be said with authority that not only  lifeand property of the  occupants of this building  but also life and property of residents of the surrounding building and structures are at grave risk as such structure  can collapse without giving any warning. In view of the above in our opinion the owner should enter in to redevelopment of the building. 

                 

We further advice that all future repairs & renovation work shall be carried out under guidance of a structural engineer though same too will be risky and will not improve chances of safety and life of building.

                  Please feel free to contact us in case of further guidance on the matter above

Thanking you,

Yours truly,

For TOTAL SOLUTION

(KaantilalLalpuria)

Consulting Structural engineer

B.M.C.Reg.No.STR/L/21

Note: -

·         The above report is based on visual inspection only. The aim is to have preliminary health check-up of a building

·         Overall condition of RCC structure is in poor condition and redevelopment is the best option.

·         In absence of design data and as built drawing, the resistance of the structure for earthquake forces / wind forces cannot be assessed.

·         It may not be possible to identify the distress in the structure below ground level. Detailed investigation if needed, are to be carried out separately.

·         Column and beam of the R.C.C frame have major cracking occurred in the concrete due to weathering condition and water seepage.

Encl:  Detailed Survey report & photographs.

REPORT AT A GLANCE FOR Saburi / Dias Building

1.    Based on visual inspection, it is felt that non-destructive tests are necessary.

2.    Over all condition of load bearing & partly RCC is found in poor  condition

3.    Most of Columns, beams have wide cracks including marble and steel is also visible. Vertical corner Columns, Beams bottoms and sides are found damaged..

4.    Most structural members are damaged & have deficiency in structural concrete causing distress on structural members. Central beams and columns in balcony are found in damaged condition.

5.    Nahni trapsand toilet block on first floor are leaking causing damages in surrounding area and affecting the area below which is toilet block and passage on ground floor.

6.    In most of the rooms structural deficiencies are found viz. in common column, beam and window top beams.

7.    In mostrooms, lintels above windows are sagged; having structural cracks resulting in weakness, seepage of water, corrosion of steel, etc. The lintels have hence bent and caused most of window framing to be cracked. We recommend removing all windows, repairing cracks, placing structural steel channels if required carrying out structural polymer repair and then refixing windows.

8.    Internal leakages are due to damaged nahni traps or due to leaking plumbing joints.

9.    Corner has heavy monsoon leakage and damaged column throughout height.

10. External dead walls of all the wings are having separations, structural, shrinkage and spider type cracks causing leakages in rooms.

11. Plant growths are also observed in plumbing duct area

12. During survey we observed that hotel is situated  within the compound open area and its roof slab is supported on existing building structure causing loading on existing building structure which is already very weak due to leaking toilet blocks and being 71 years old building.

13. There are lots of rats and rodents in building compound due toadjacent to mithi river nala and building property houses hotel. These rats have dug and made base hollow and weak affecting the earth below building foundations which is very dangerous as building is more than 70 years old.

14.  Earth in plinth level is also affected due to rats and rodents and as a result ground floor flooring having settlement and became uneven.

15. Terrace flooring is badly damaged having wide cracks, pit holes  and plant growth  which is causing heavy leakages in rooms below to prevent leakages. Shalimar sheeting applied on floor and parapet wall are already old and worn out.

16. Parapet wall  top is having major cracks  causing leakages in room below   sides of parapet wall  entire area plaster is also having  cracks and having hollow sound .

17. Junction of parapet wall is also having plant growth roots of which is damaging terrace floor.

For details refer to attached photographs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SABURI FORMMERLY KOWN AS DIAS BUILDING

Room wise internal & external Survey

Ground floor

East Side Room

Two common columns are  in damaged condition and steel also visible

North side

Room no 1-

South side wall and ceiling has monsoon leakage from external side

North side wall and ceiling has monsoon leakage from upper floor

Room no-2

Ceiling plaster has fallen down and steel also visible

South side wall and ceiling has LIVE LEAKAGE from upper floor

West side

Wall and ceiling has LIVE LEAKAGE from upper floor

Wall and ceiling plaster has fallen down

Flooring has uneven including ladhi

Passage -ceiling plaster IS fallen down steel   is also visible

Wall plaster has fallen down

West side external garage

Ceiling plaster has fallen down steel is also visible

Hotel external side drainage side Wall and ceiling are Dilapidate condition and having loose plaster

Column is in  badly damage condition

North side

Office- ceiling has loose plaster and seepage from upper floor

First floor

Bathroom passage –ceiling plaster has fallen down and steel also visible

Ceiling has seepage

First floor passage ceiling has seepage

East side room

Ceiling plaster has bulged

Window top beam has major structural crack

North side room

Ceiling plaster has bulged and live leakage from external side

Main door top beam has vertical crack

External side

North side

Plant growth on the terrace parapet wall and wall is in  damaged  condition

First floor Window sill wall has seepage, cracks and loose plaster

Ground floor wall has loose plaster and seepage from first floor

East side

Ground floor common column is damage condition

Wall plaster has fallen down

First floor chajja has badly damage condition steel also visible

Terrace parapet wall has damage condition and having plant is growth

South side

Ground to first floor wall plaster has fallen down

First floor chajja has damage condition

External side staircase railing has damage condition and steel also visible

East side compound wall has major crack

 Staircase

 South side column has major crack

Head room -Ceiling has damage condition and steel also visible

Railing is in damaged condition

Supported beam and column has damage condition

Terrace

Terrace flooring is badly damaged having wide cracks, pit holes  and plant growth  which is causing heavy leakages in rooms below to prevent leakages Shalimar sheeting  has done on floor and parapet wall.

Parapet wall  top is having major cracks  causing leakages in room below   sides of parapet wall  entire area plaster is also having  cracks and having hollow sound

Junction of parapet wall is also having plant  growth roots of which is damaging terrace floor.

Buildings don't tell you when they'll collapse: Bombay high court

Buildings don't tell you when they'll collapse: Bombay high court

MUMBAI: Dilapidated buildings don't tell when they will collapse, observed the Bombay high court on Wednesday while asking a section of residents of a building in Lower Parel why they have refused to vacate it. A division bench of Justice V M Kanade and Justice M S Sonak heard a petition by Hare Krishna Builders alleging inaction by Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (Mhada) to evict the non-cooperating tenants of a 90-year-old dilapidated building, which is likely to collapse. The petition said while 70 per cent tenants of Deen Building had vacated the premises, 39 tenants were not cooperating with the builder. The court had earlier directed Mhada to hear the developer and the non-cooperating tenants. On Wednesday, Mhada advocate told the court that the hearing was complete and an order had been passed. But he sought time saying its joint chief officer of the repair board was not available. The 39 tenants intervened saying they wished to be heard in the matter. The judges questioned why they were not vacating the building. They also referred to the Kalwa building crash on November 18 saying it was a "fortunate" escape because of a vigilant resident. "All the tenants were saved because of an alert tenant who came home late. In such cases the building is not going to tell when it will collapse," remarked Justice Kanade. The court was informed by the advocate of the 39 tenants that the developer did not comply with condition of intimation of disapproval and did not construct the post office which was supposed to come up on the plot. "You are not worried about your life but of the post office," said Justice Kanade. The judges said all issues would be examined in their entirety and adjourned the hearing toDecember 3.

Source: The Times of India

Bailiff of Bandra Small causes court looses summons...is is part of greater design

Our family is a owner of a building known as Saburi, Vakola Bridge, Santacruz east, Mumbai 400055. There is an old tenant in our building known as Mrs. Bina Chowdhuri. All her sons are well settled and live separately for decades.  She had more properties in Santacruz east which she sold years back for premium.  She has substantial bank investments and savings.

Presently she has huge property of Wadia’s (about 3000sq mts approx) and a bungalow in Vakola area besides she is tenant in our above building. She is occupying certain premises on first floor of our building  but filed a case in the year 1990 on us claiming tenancy rights to terrace etc.. Her advocate is very costly, very powerful; keeps filing unnecessary applications, courts practically are run to his whims and wishes. So 23 years have passed and I find no end to the case in my life time due to strong arms of Advocate Amin Nathani and his smartf Bandra Small  delaying tactics.

My son has become coowner of this building in place of my late beloved mother as per her last will and probate.

He is B.E ( 1^st Class Mumbai university, passed several exams of share market, AMFI, cleared International  CFA level 2 ) and working for a corporate house for over 4 years.  Now he wishes to start his own office.

So he filed a case of eviction for personal bonafide use on this lady who has kept the premises under lock and key for years. Her rent is Rs 138/- p.m. only.

To begin with many advocates refused to take up case if Ad Nathani was to represent the opposite party. Some how when an advocate agreed then due to several reasons from both side filing was delayed. Ultimately case was filed but bailiff came on a day close to case date so daughter of Mrs. Bina Chowdhuri refused to accept the summons. Process for second service was done and was assigned to a bailiff on 23^rd October 2013. When I enquired on 16^th Nov. 2013 with bailiff dept of Small causes court, Bandra I was told bailiff has lost the summons and earlier service refusal report. I wonder if this is a beginning  of delaying tactics.

Earlier in Bandra small causes court files have been  misplaced, 5 years my application for expediting was pending  where as in her appeal judge gave order for expediting on the basis of age in short title, on her request court appointed one after another court commissioner to inspect the building but  either  they were dead, migrated away from Mumbai, retired etc and thus wasted years. Finally one CC was appointed who went over board and instead of just inspecting and giving report on condition of building he fixed the responsibility of landlord to carry out heavy repairs on terrace and how to carry out same. Without acknowledging the fact that this tenant had taken injunction against landlord prohibiting entry to the terrace so all these years landlord could not carry our repairs and tenant on purpose neglected same.

So this is what is in store when you are a litigant in India and especially in Small causes court.

Recently in another case my advocate surprisingly asked for an adjournment as Ad Nathani was not there where as he is supposed to press for going ahead as matter is 23 years old. Ad Nathani or his clients never give written application for adjournments.

In another matter Appeal court fixed a very low mesne profit so thru RTI I applied for copies of various orders passed in similar matter in same court but court is evasive in giving same and made me run pillar to post  citing technical ( nonexistent ground).

In sessions court PP Chavan remained silent but advocate of accused shouts, growls and Blames and  terrifies the victim and the lady Judge Joshi used to quietly witness  the onslaught on crying innocent girl.

So much so today as leaving for outstation.

But I will be back with my experience in courts.

 

 

 

 

 

Bombay high court has directed a Juhu tenant to vacate her flat

Shibu Thomas TNN 

Mumbai: The Bombay high court has directed a Juhu tenant, the lone occupant of a dilapidated building, to vacate her flat within one month. The tenant, Esther Manickam, who has been paying a monthly rent of Rs 50 for decades, was offered Rs 1 crore by the owner to move out of old building but she had refused. 
    Justice Anoop Mohta refused to grant the tenant any relief against the demolition notice served by the BMC for the old building which has been declared dangerous.
    “The structure if it is required to be demolished and as except Esther all have already vacated, there is no reason that the building in question (should) be repaired by the owner only to permit her to occupy one flat in question,” said Justice Mohta. The judge cited earlier orders of the court that allowed “the corporation to evict occupier/owner of dilapidated building even by force”. 
    The court said the tenant’s offer to repair the premises was of “no assistance as it would cause further complications and especially when no one else is occupying the other portions”. 
    The court said it cannot direct that the building be maintained just because a lone opposing tenant wants to continue to occupy a dangerous building. 
    Esther, who has been staying in the Juhu flat measuring 340 square feet for decades and paying a monthly rent of Rs 50, refused to move out of the building despite the landlord’s offer of Rs 1 crore. ‘Forcing owner to maintain bldg for one resident unjust’ 
Mumbai: The BMC had earlier this year served a demolition notice on a Juhu building which had been classified as dangerous. A report by VJTI also said that repairs were not viable for the old building. But the tenant, Esther Manickam, had rejected the Rs 1 crore offer by the owner to vacate and insisted on a flat in a new building on the same premises. The landlord and the developer refused to give her that saying 13 other tenants of the building had accepted the same offer. 
    The Bombay HC said it could not overlook the expert’s opinion and said that Esther’s claims in her applications were “contradictory, inconsistent and in fact self destructive”. 
    “Esther, though at her risk is occupying the premises alone and compelling the landlord/owner to maintain the whole premises/building in spite of the clear offer given to her, is unjustifiable,” said the judge. 
    “The owner of the property is entitled to deal with the property. Even otherwise, tenants cannot object to transfer and/or even to create thirdparty rights or interest in such property by the landlord. The owner, therefore, if he wants to develop the property, but for want of insistence to have permanent alternate accommodation in the same premises, (and hurdles are created) to the whole project, is entitled to oppose the action of the tenant,” the court said. 
    “The costs already incurred by paying a huge amount just cannot be overlooked merely because one tenant is opposing to develop and/or not permitting the owner to develop the property.” The HC said that the owner of the property cannot be compelled to give a specific offer to a tenant. 
    The HC refused to give Esther any reprieve from the demolition proceedings and allowed her four weeks’ time to vacate her flat on the condition that she files an undertaking to move out.

Staff of Saburi landlord maintaining Garden in front of Saburi