MUMBAI, Oct. 24 -- The Bombay High Court on Thursday directed the occupants of Vijay Industrial Estate in Goregaon East to vacate the premises within three weeks, saying the dilapidated condition of the 53-year-old building poses "an eminent threat to the life and limb of the occupier and members". "The building in question is in a precarious, unsafe condition and needs to be repaired at the earliest for the simple reason that it is unsafe for human habitation," a division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna said, dismissing a petition filed by seven residents of the building, challenging the notice issued by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) directing demolition of the structure. The judges said that historic buildings in Mumbai are a reminder of the city's rich and aesthetic architectural styles. "In order to preserve the authenticity of the buildings, it is important that certain legal measures be taken so that the safety and stability can be certified under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act, 1888," they observed. The industrial estate, located on IB Patel Road in Goregaon East, was constructed in 1973. On September 3, the BMC issued a notice classifying the structure under the C-1 category, after an audit report revealed that the building was "not safe" and in "a highly critical condition". While seven members and occupants of the building challenged the BMC notice before the high court, Vinod Mukund Meher, chairman of the co-operative society, opposed the petition through advocates Abhijeet Desai and Meezan Patel. The lawyers argued that the society itself had acknowledged the building's dilapidated condition and the C-1 classification in April, and that the occupants could not take a contrary stand now to resist the BMC's action. The court observed that the petitioners had not brought on record any justifiable reason to disregard the structural audit report. The record clearly showed that the building in question was in a "precarious, unsafe condition and needs to be repaired at the earliest for the simple reason that it is unsafe for human habitation", the court noted. The bench also considered a report submitted by an advocate appointed as court commissioner, who inspected the premises and concluded that the "building is in a dilapidated and hazardous condition", and it would be "ideal to evacuate and thereafter demolish the same at the earliest to prevent any loss to life". "This is not a fit case where any independent structural audit can be conducted in the given factual position," the court said. Accepting the petitioners' contention would "lead to a situation where there is no end to such process, merely because the report does not suit or meet the requirements of some of the occupants", it noted....