https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/elevator-supreme-court-sc-ruling-raw-vipin-handa-manufacturer-maker-owner-operator-lift-safety-passenger-death-101785352829350-amp.htm
Please go through above link.
A key point to anyone is why voltage stabiliser is not part of lift, if it is considered as critical observation by manufacturer as a reason for accident. BIS Standard specification should include this instead of as an option.
NOT ONLY FOR LIFTS BUT ALL THOSE THAT ENDANGER SAFETY OF PERSONS, ENVIRONMENT AND PROPERTY.
A Landmark Supreme Court Judgment - Every Lift User Should Know.
Millions of Indians use elevators every day—in apartment complexes, offices, hospitals, shopping malls, hotels and public buildings. We enter a lift with complete trust that it will safely carry us to our destination. That trust, the Supreme Court of India has now emphatically held, is not merely an expectation but a legal guarantee.
In a landmark judgment delivered on 30 July 2026, the Supreme Court has significantly strengthened the rights of lift users and fixed responsibility for lift accidents in a clear and practical manner.
Why this judgment is important
India’s cities are growing vertically, making lifts an indispensable part of modern life. Every day, crores of people rely on elevators without having any control over their design, maintenance or operation.
Recognising this reality, the Supreme Court observed that once a person enters a lift, he or she entrusts personal safety entirely to others. Therefore, those responsible for the lift owe passengers the highest standard of care.
The Court’s Landmark Ruling
The Court has ruled that in the event of a lift accident, responsibility is jointly shared by:
The lift manufacturer or installer.
The maintenance agency responsible for servicing the lift.
The owner or management of the building where the lift is installed.
The Court described a lift as being comparable to a “common carrier”, meaning that it carries passengers and therefore must meet a very high standard of safety.
A major relief for victims
Perhaps the most significant part of the judgment is this:
A victim or the victim’s family does not have to determine who was actually at fault before seeking compensation.
Instead, the injured person—or the family in case of death—may claim full compensation from any one of the responsible parties. It is then for those parties to settle their respective shares of liability among themselves._
This removes a major hurdle that victims previously faced, where different agencies often blamed one another, delaying justice.
The case behind the judgment
The ruling arose from a tragic accident in 2003 at the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) headquarters in New Delhi.
Former diplomat Vipin Handa became trapped when a lift malfunctioned. During rescue operations, the lift suddenly moved, fatally crushing him while eleven others escaped safely.
The Supreme Court found that the elevator had a history of repeated defects. Despite knowing about these problems, adequate safety measures were not taken and the lift was never declared unsafe for use. The manufacturer argued about cautioning the user department for installation of voltage stabiliser due to fluctuations in voltage, and not done by user department, which was not acceptable to honourable Court.
The Court upheld compensation of over ₹3 crore, together with interest, for the victim’s family. It apportioned liability as follows:
- Lift company – 70%
- Maintenance/supervising engineering agency – 25%
- Building user/management – 5%
Lessons for Housing Societies and Building Managers
This judgment should serve as a wake-up call.
Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs), apartment associations, commercial establishments and institutional buildings should ensure:
- Regular preventive maintenance by authorised agencies.
- Immediate attention to every complaint regarding unusual sounds, jerks or door malfunction.
- Proper maintenance records and inspection logs.
- Annual safety inspections as required by applicable laws.
- Immediate shutdown of any lift showing signs of unsafe operation until repairs are completed.
- Adequate emergency communication systems inside lifts.
- Training of security and maintenance staff in safe rescue procedures.
Ignoring complaints or postponing repairs can now have serious legal as well as financial consequences.
*What every lift user should remember.*
As users, we also have responsibilities:
- Never overload a lift beyond its rated capacity.
- Do not force doors open or try to exit a lift stuck between floors.
- Use the alarm button or emergency communication system if trapped.
- Wait for trained personnel during rescue.
- Report even minor irregularities such as unusual noises, jerks or misalignment immediately.
Small warning signs often precede major accidents.
A Judgment that Strengthens Public Safety.
The Supreme Court has sent a powerful message: passenger safety cannot be compromised.
The era of manufacturers, maintenance contractors and building owners shifting blame onto one another is over. Every stakeholder connected with a lift has a legal duty to ensure that it remains safe throughout its service life.
For millions of Indians who step into elevators every day without a second thought, this judgment is a welcome affirmation that the law stands firmly on the side of passenger safety.
Awareness is the first step towards prevention. Share this information with your family, friends, neighbours and Resident Welfare Associations. It may one day save a life.
