Homemaker’s Services Invaluable, Not Comparable To Unskilled Wages: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation
A homemaker died in a motor vehicle accident, and her family sought enhanced compensation for the loss.
Justice Archana Puri, Punjab and Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while adjudicating a batch of appeals seeking enhancement of compensation in motor accident claims, emphasized that the services rendered by a housewife cannot be valued at par with the minimum wages of an unskilled worker.
The case arose from the tragic death of a homemaker, in a road accident, for which compensation was being claimed by her husband and their five children.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had earlier assessed her income at Rs. 4500 per month, aligning it closely with the then-prevailing minimum wage for unskilled labor, which was Rs. 4847 per month. After deducting personal expenses, the total compensation awarded amounted to Rs. 6,37,000.
A Bench of Justice Archana Puri stated that, “It is necessary to keep in mind that the contribution made by the wife to the house, is invaluable and cannot be computed in terms of money. The gratuitous services rendered by the wife, with true love and affection to the children and her husband and managing the household affairs, in any manner, cannot be equated with the services rendered by others."
The Court acknowledged that although homemaker services are not remunerated in economic terms, they encompass a vast array of responsibilities, including nurturing children, managing domestic chores, and providing emotional support. Thus, compensation in such cases must reflect the actual impact of the loss to the family, especially to the dependent children and spouse.
The Court further remarked that in the absence of precise economic data, the term "services" should be interpreted in a broad and inclusive manner, recognizing both the tangible and intangible contributions made by the deceased to her household.
Considering her age at the time of death—27 years—and the fact that she was a mother to five children, the Court reassessed her monthly income at a modest yet more realistic Rs. 5000. It also added 40% for future prospects, a standard practice under prevailing compensation laws, bringing her notional income to Rs. 7000 per month.
Using the multiplier method—a judicially approved formula for determining loss of dependency—the Court arrived at a revised compensation amount of Rs. 10,71,000.
Cause Title: Rabina v. Arshad & Ors., [2025:PHHC:058007]
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocate Arjun Attri
Respondents: Advocates Vinod Kumar, Rajesh Lamba, Digvijay, Ashish Gupta, Pradeep Kumar