Mr.Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, Advocate has been heard on behalf of the appellant/complainant.  The matter arose from the vehicle accident which occurred on 15.7.2009.  The case of the complainant is that when it happened, the airbags designed for security of the driver and passengers of the vehicle, failed to open.  As a result thereof, complainant’s husband suffered injuries for which the complaint was filed before the State Commission. 

The State Commission has clearly recorded in its order of 1.10.2012 that after filing the written statement, the complainant was afforded opportunity to lead evidence as per orders dated 7.8.2012 and 12.9.2012.  However, no evidence was led on behalf of the complainant.  Even on 1.10.2012, the State Commission has noted that neither the complainant has paid the costs nor produced any evidence.  Therefore, the compliant was dismissed holding that it was not a fit case for adjournment at the instance of the complainant.

Learned counsel for the appellant while arguing before us placed the responsibility for failure to lead evidence entirely at the door of the counsel who represented the appellant/complainant before the State Commission.  However, he agreed that no evidence of any kind was led before the State Commission before the impugned order was passed.  Learned counsel also sought to draw our attention to some photographs of the accident.  However, he fairly conceded that there was no attempt to place them before the State Commission.

Perusal of the impugned order also shows that the State Commission has taken note of the written response of the OP/respondent Honda Sielcare India Ltd.  It is pleaded therein that :

“It is alleged that as per the admission of the complainant, the car was standing on the red light point when a truck hit the vehicle from behind as a result of which vehicle collided with another vehicle. Activation of air bags is related to deceleration caused by the impact and this obviously did not occur at the required rate in the present t case for its activation. The air bags are activated only if certain specific pre conditions vis-a vis the collusion angle, collision speed or collision obstacle are met. The opposite party further states that none of the aforesaid pre condition were met when the car was involved in the accident and in the circumstances the so-called complaint pertaining to the non-operation of the air bags during the accident is unfounded and baseless. The opposite party further state that the air bags are an additional safety feature and are activated only in specific circumstances. The care has been provided with supplemental Restraint system (SRS) consisting of air bags to help protect the head and chest of the diver and the front seat passenger (Co-driver) during a frontal collision. As set out in Owner’s Manual (“the Manual”), the air bags do not offer any protection in cases of rear impacts, rollovers or minor frontal or side collisions. Due to the fact that their unwarranted activation could cause injury to the driver and co-driver as the air bags inflate with tremendous force and speed.”

We have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the appellant and gone through the records filed by him and find no ground to interfere with the impugned order.  It is held to be a clear case where the appellant/complainant was given sufficient opportunity by the State Commission for leading evidence but failed to respond.  We do not accept the argument that it was lapse of his counsel and not of the appellant. 

Appeal has no merit and is dismissed as such.