‘Chintels collapse a serious incident’: SC seeks builder, govt, police replies
NEW DELHI: Terming the collapse of six floors of a recently constructed tower in Gurugram’s Chintels Paradiso condominium a “serious matter”, the Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the builder, the Haryana government, police and local authorities on the necessary repairs to be carried out on the remaining “unsafe” structures within the project.
Issuing notice on a petition filed by 188 residents of the housing society demanding the structural defects be cured and rent be paid to residents who were forced to vacate the towers, the bench of justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy said, “See the advertisement which you (builder) made showing lush green landscape. But what is the reality we all know.”
On February 10, the roof of a condominium collapsed, causing the six floors below it, up to the first floor also caving in, and killing two people. Posting the matter to January 21, the bench said, “How do you build such a structure? It is a serious matter that a structure constructed so recently collapsed.”
The builder was represented by senior advocate ANS Nadkarni who sought to allay the concerns raised by the bench. “It is a very good project but what happened is unfortunate. Those who suffered losses were compensated.”
Putting the blame on residents, Nadkarni said, “Without letting the developer know, the residents brought in machinery and made some changes. Due to the machine, the entire building vibrated.”
Representing residents, advocate Prashant Bhushan said the state government should be directed to present details of the structural audit of the nine towers within the Chintels Paradiso apartments. “According to the audit carried out, all towers are unsafe. The residents in these towers have been asked to move out while they have decided to demolish that tower where the incident took place.” Bhushan said, before requesting the court to seek a report from the Haryana government on the status of the criminal investigation into the death of the two persons.
To this, the bench remarked, “That is the primary thing they will have to give.”
The bench told Nadkarni, “You have to help them. We must remind you that there is a criminal case also against you.” Nadkarni sought time to take instructions while stating that inspection has been carried out only for the tower where the collapse took place.
In April, the top court had showed its inclination to hear the matter after 188 petitioners told the court that it was an “extraordinary case” where regulatory authorities turned a blind eye to the irregularities.
How do you build such a structure? It is a serious matter that a structure constructed so recently collapsed. SUPREME COURT