NEW DELHI: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court on Thursday recognised homemakers as nation builders and held that the loss of domestic care services should be counted as a separate head of compensation. The Court set a notional monthly income of Rs 30,000 for computing the loss.
A two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Sanjay Karol and comprising Justice N Kotiswar Singh, highlighted the economic worth of unpaid household work and said the term “homemaker” should now stand for “nation builder”.
“Housewives contribute to the household. They are nation builders. They build the nation. How do you assess that contribution and monetise it? The word ‘homemaker’ would now acquire the acronym of nation builder,” the bench observed.
The Court, in its ruling, further added that it had passed directions and expressed hope and trust that the Chief Justices of all High Courts would oversee the issue.
“We have evolved a new principle and laid down that the loss of domestic care should be monetised at a minimum of Rs 30,000 per month, in addition to all other available avenues under the Supreme Court judgment in the Pranay Sethi case,” said Justice Karol while pronouncing the operative part of the judgment.
The operational portion of the ruling says, “…for the three major heads (the homemaker’s contribution towards smooth functioning of the household, the loss of maternal support for children and loss of spousal support/the support and care of their child who is an adult, for the parents of the deceased) ..., a composite sum of `30,000/- shall be added under the head of ‘loss of domestic care’, provided that all three of these heads are met in the given case. This determination shall be revised by 10%, cumulatively, every three years.”
The Bench said, “It is ironic to describe a homemaker as dependant on earning members, when, in reality the household’s functioning depends substantially on the homemaker.”
The bench further added that the loss of domestic care must be treated as an additional head of compensation, recognising the significant yet often unpaid contribution of homemakers to families and society.
The apex court pronounced the judgment after hearing an appeal arising from a motor accident claim in Punjab, where a woman named Reshma died in a road accident in November 2001. Following this, her husband and three children approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking compensation.
Also in top court
No psychological evaluation of kids: SC
The SC on Thursday issued detailed guidelines on assessing children involved in custody battles, cautioning family courts against ordering psychological evaluation of minors unless essential. The bench held that courts should first evaluate the mental state of the parents before considering assessment of child.
Rs 25L for man injured in tree branch crash
The SC on Thursday came to the rescue of a man, who was left paralysed in a freak incident nearly 19 years ago when a tree branch fell on his autorickshaw in Bengaluru, by enhancing compensation to Rs 25 lakh. The top court held that in such cases, a claim seeking compensation under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
