Delhi High Court: An application was filed by the plaintiff seeking an appointment of a technical expert committee at its cost, who will take core samples from across the entire construction in a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.750 crores on the basis that the RCC construction carried out by the defendant contractors have been found unsafe. Yogesh Khanna, J., appointed IIT Mumbai to conduct the scientific examination of the RCC structure at NBCC Green View project and submit its report at the earliest.
In view of the risk posed by the unsafe RCC structure, on 17-02-2022, the District Disaster Management Authority, Gurugram (DDMA) ordered the inhabitants residing in the NBCC Green View to vacate their premises and hand over the vacant physical possession of the same to NBCC within 15 days of passing of the order. Thereafter, on 26-07-2022, Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Haryana (DTCP) directed NBCC to start the process of demolition of the building within one month. Both these orders of DDMA and DTCP, Haryana have not been challenged by the defendants.
In the meantime, on 10-02-2022, some floors of Tower D in a nearby private builders project Chintels Paradiso collapsed and two people were killed. In the main suit filed by the plaintiff, vide order dated 17-03-2023, the Court permitted the plaintiff to place on the record further photographic evidence. The plaintiffs accordingly filed 130 photographs of NBCC Green View project in Court which rather showed the dilapidated condition of the building. Thus, an expert committee was sought to carry out further tests and conduct scientific investigation as deemed proper, and then give the detailed test reports to this Court.
The plaintiff submitted that if an expert committee is not appointed and scientific tests are not carried out, some of the defendants may even wish to wrongly contend that RCC structures are safe for human habitation and if there is self-collapse there could be fatalities and evidence would be lost.
The issue under consideration is whether an expert commission to conduct scientific examination be appointed or not under Order 26 Rule 10A CPC?
The Court noted that the Code of Civil Procedure was amended by Act No. 104 of 1976 w.e.f. 1-02-1977. The amendment was made in Section 75 permitting the Court to issue a Commission to hold scientific, technical, or expert investigations. Further, Rule 10A, 10 B and 10C were also inserted in Order 26 CPC. The Court further noted that it cannot be ignored that between 01-02-1977 and today in the year 2023, there has been great strides in scientific & forensic investigation and worldwide use for justice purpose, whether criminal or civil.
The Court concluded that considering the question of the safety of human life & larger interest of public safety being involved and the photographs depicting the sorry state of affairs, the question arising in this suit demands scientific investigation, which cannot be conducted by the court, thus, it is necessary and an expedient in the interest of justice to appoint an expert from renowned institutions with thorough knowledge of subject and access of sophisticated testing equipment.
Thus, the Court appointed IIT Mumbai as an Expert Committee to carry out the six tests, i.e., Test-1 Cement Content; Test-2 crushing strength; Test-3 Corroding Steel Falling Concrete; Test-4 Solidity — Soundness Level; Test-5 Chemical analysis — Chloride content; and Test-6 Carbonation Depth. Defendants are free to participate and suggest over and above the above six tests which they think should be carried out for the concrete that was cast but do so without causing any obstruction or delay. All expenses and Expert Commission fees will be paid directly by the plaintiffs.
The Court directed IIT Mumbai to depute a senior professor in concrete testing to carry out the tests & investigations and give their report at the earliest, upon which, the report will be taken in accordance with law.
[NBCC (India) Limited v Ramacivil India Construction Private Limited, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 5472, decided on 23-08-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Arun Mohan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vipul Ganda, Mr. Arvind Bhatt, Ms. Ritika Choubey, Ms. Swastika Singh, Ms. Amodini Raina, Ms. Abhipsa Mohanty, Advocates for plaintiff
Mr. Anil Sapra, Senior Advocate with Mr. S. K.Gandhi, Mr. Srikanth Varma, Advocates for D1. Mr. Avinash Trivedi, Mr. Amnay Kaushik, Advocates for D2 to 4.
Mr. Pranjit Bhattacharya, Ms.Raj Sarit Khare, Advocates for D5 and 6.
Mr. Keshri Kumar, Advocate for D11.
Mr. Vivek Singh, Ms. Pratima Dwivedi, Advocates for D14.
Mr. Jayesh Unnikirshnan, Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Mr. Udit Sharma, Mr. Shaiwal Shivastava, Advocates for D16 and 17
