A recent survey has unveiled a concerning trend in residential lift safety across India, with nearly half of all users or their family members reporting at least one incident of being trapped in a lift during the last year. The findings, released by LocalCircles, highlight a significant lack of confidence in elevator safety among residents, coinciding with a landmark Supreme Court judgment that redefines accountability for lift accidents.
Widespread Incidents and Low Confidence in Residential Lift Safety
The LocalCircles survey, conducted recently, revealed that a striking 46% of residential lift users experienced being stuck in an elevator at least once in the past 12 months. Among these incidents, 23% occurred 1-2 times, 8% involved 3-5 occurrences, and 15% reported being trapped 6-9 times within a year. This pattern of recurring faults could suggest negligence, as indicated by the Supreme Court.
Beyond direct incidents, the survey also exposed a significant trust deficit: 33% of respondents expressed a complete lack of confidence in the safety of lifts within their buildings. Furthermore, 21% of respondents noted that their residential lifts lacked a proper Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC), a critical oversight given the nature of the equipment.
Supreme Court Declares Elevators 'Common Carriers'
These survey results emerge just days after a pivotal July 29, 2026, Supreme Court judgment in the case of Otis Elevator Company (India) Ltd. vs. Rashmi Handa. The court, with a bench comprising Justice P. S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe, ruled that elevators are to be considered “common carriers.” This legal classification imposes a higher standard of care on manufacturers, maintenance agencies, and building owners, as passengers surrender control over their safety upon entering a lift.
The ruling clarifies that these parties can be held jointly and severally liable for lift safety, simplifying the process for accident victims to seek compensation without needing to prove which specific stakeholder was negligent. The court’s decision upheld a 2014 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) order, which awarded approximately ₹3.01 crore plus interest to the family of a RAW officer who tragically died in a 2003 lift accident in New Delhi.
Implications for Building Management and Maintenance
The Supreme Court's judgment sets a nationwide standard for accountability, emphasizing the heightened duty of care for all entities involved in lift operation and maintenance. For housing societies, Residents' Welfare Associations (RWAs), builders, and lift companies, this means increased scrutiny on documented AMCs, regular inspections, lift registration, and robust emergency rescue preparedness.
Currently, lift safety regulations vary significantly across Indian states, with only about 17 states having specific lift laws, and enforcement remaining inconsistent. While the Uttar Pradesh Lift and Escalator Act, 2024, mandates registration, automatic rescue devices, and penalties, many states still rely on older, less comprehensive regulations. The Bureau of Indian Standards' IS 17900, implemented in December 2025, aims to align Indian standards with global safety norms but is not yet uniformly mandatory nationwide. The Supreme Court's ruling is expected to push for greater adherence and stricter compliance across the board.