Carmakers liable to pay damages if airbags don’t deploy, orders Supreme Court | Latest News India

NEW DELHI: Deployment of airbags in a automobile ought to stop accidents and failure to meet this customary will make carmakers liable to pay damages, stated the Supreme Court in a verdict this week awarding damages of 3 lakh to a automobile proprietor who suffered accidents because the airbags of his Hyundai Creta automobile failed to open on influence throughout an accident in 2017.

The courtroom additionally directed the car producer to exchange the automobile, discarding the company’s defence that airbags will open solely on frontal influence.

The judgment on Wednesday by a bench of justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose stated, “Deployment of airbags ought to have prevented injuries being caused to those travelling in the vehicle, particularly in the front seat. A consumer is not meant to be an expert in physics to calculate the impact of a collision on the theories based on velocity and force.”

The company argued throughout hearings that the automobile was designed to deploy the entrance airbags solely when an influence is sufficiently extreme and when the influence angle is lower than 30 levels from the ahead longitudinal axis of the automobile. Both the Delhi shopper courtroom and the nationwide shopper fee beforehand gave concurrent verdicts holding the carmaker responsible for the accidents.

The bench stated: “Ordinarily, a consumer while purchasing a vehicle with airbags would assume that the same would be deployed whenever there is a collision from the front portion of the vehicle.”

Shailender Bhatnagar, who filed the petition, informed the courtroom that he purchased the automobile in August 2015 largely due to its safety characteristic of deployment of airbags. The guide didn’t comprise any clause that airbags wouldn’t open in each circumstance and there was no clause excluding the producer’s legal responsibility. However, in November 2017 when the Creta pushed by Bhatnagar on the Delhi-Panipat freeway hit a truck, the airbag didn’t perform and he sustained a number of accidents.

Justice Bose, writing the judgment for the bench stated, “The failure to provide an airbag system which would meet the safety standards as perceived by a car buyer of reasonable prudence, in our view, should be subject to punitive damages which can have a deterrent effect.” The high courtroom even upheld the course of the state and nationwide shopper commissions to direct the company to exchange substitute of the automobile.

The judgment stated, “Damages awarded against the appellant (Hyundai) may have gone beyond the actual loss suffered by the respondent (victim) and may not represent the actual loss suffered by him in monetary terms. But the provision of Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 permits awarding punitive damages. Such damages, in our view, can be awarded in the event the defect is found to have the potential to cause serious injury or major loss to the consumer, particularly in respect of safety features of a vehicle.”

The shopper discussion board earlier divided the compensation underneath heads of medical bills and earnings loss ( 2 lakh), psychological agony ( 50,000) and value of litigation ( 50,000). The nationwide fee’s ruling was delivered on January 5 final year in opposition to which Hyundai had filed an enchantment earlier than the highest courtroom.

Back to top button