On the structural soundness and stability of the toilet block is concerned, there has been divergent opinion and in this context, in order to instil the confidence on the defendants, who are the management of the large school, that too a girl school in the vicinity of the Heart of the city, as to how the remedial measures to strengthen the stability soundness of the building can be made and by whom- As it is not a mere issue of payment of some money to the contractor, i.e., the plaintiff of doubt shall be permitted to prevail in the minds of the defendants and therefore in order to have the complete confidence, they needed the best services in this field to be availed-But also it is a great concern that 100% safety of thousands of girl students from LKG to XII standard studying in the school of the defendants are to be ensured as no iota

JUDGMENT :

(Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as against the order, dated 05.08.2019 made in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.2204 of 2019 on the file of the XVII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.)

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order passed by the XVII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.2204 of 2019 by order, dated 05.08.2019.

2. The necessary facts which are required to be noticed for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition are as follows :

(i) That the Civil Revision Petitioners are the defendants in the suit and the respondent herein is the plaintiff. The parties are called as per the array of parties in the suit itself.

(ii) The first defendant is a society and their main object is to conduct the educational institutions, accordingly, they run a Matriculation School called Sacred Heart Matriculation School, situated at Church Park School campus at Anna Salai, Chennai. The second defendant is the Vice President-cum-mother superior of the first defendant.

(iii) The plaintiff is a private limited company, which was formally known as M/s. Judie Constructions Pvt., Ltd., subsequently renamed as M/s. Jude’s Infra Technologies Pvt., Ltd., represented by its Managing Director. The plaintiff company has been in the field of construction for more than 40 years and have built number of schools, colleges and churches both in India and abroad.

(iv) In the school run by the first defendant, namely the Sacred Heart Matriculation School, there are 2047 students studying from LKG to XII Standard and in order to provide rest rooms as an additional facility for those students, the defendants decided to construct a toilet block separately consisting of ground and first floor.

(v) Accordingly, a construction agreement had been entered into between the defendants and the plaintiff on 10.10.2017 and on that date itself, the construction site had been handed over to the plaintiff.

(vi) Among various clauses of the construction agreement, the relevant clauses, according to the defendants as well as the plaintiff are that, the contractor should obtain the building permit, electrical board connection and all the approvals required for construction. All structural work should be carried out as per the drawing provided by structural consultant. All the electrical and plumbing work has to be carried out as per the drawing provided by the electrical and plumbing consultant.

(vii) The duration of the construction, according to Clause 4 of the agreement, was four months from the date of commencement.

(viii) Accordingly, construction had been made by the plaintiff and even though, as per the agreement, a total sum of Rs.86,32,000/- had been fixed excluding applicable taxes for construction cost, a sum of Rupees one Crore had been paid as advance by the defendants to the plaintiff. After the completion of the construction, the toilet block, i.e., the building in question had been handed over to the defendants on 03.06.2018. Thereafter the plaintiff seems to have made a claim for the remaining payment as the cost of construction, according to the plaintiff, had gone to a total sum of Rs.1,21,52,150/- + 18% tax, i.e., Rs.21,87,387/-, therefore the grand total was Rs.1,43,39,537/-, out of which since Rupees one Crore was paid as advance the net balance, according to the plaintiff, payable by the defendants was Rs.43,39,537/-.

(ix) In the meanwhile, the building in question handed over by the plaintiff to the defendants in first week of June 2018 had been put to use for the students. However, according to the defendants, they found that, there are lot of defects in the building. Some of the notable defects, according to the defendants, are that

(a) There is accumulation of water outside the middle entrance of the building.

(b) The ceiling on the left hand side o