"Homemaker's worth can't be calculated in numbers": HC orders insurance company to pay Rs 16 lakh compensation

The Delhi High Court, in response to an insurance company's appeal against a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) order, has observed that no amount of compensation could adequately replace the love, care, and warmth provided by a homemaker to her family.

Justice Gaurang Kanth, presiding over the single-judge bench, made this observation while addressing the issue of computing compensation for a homemaker's death. The court rejected the argument that notional income for a homemaker cannot be determined based on the Minimum Wages Act due to lack of income and education proof.

The court stated, "Calculating compensation for the demise of a homemaker is a complex and intricate task that necessitates a comprehensive approach, taking into account the multifaceted and voluntary services offered by a homemaker to her family. This court acknowledges the various roles fulfilled by a housewife – a wife, mother, daughter, daughter-in-law, etc. – which cannot be accurately quantified in terms of monetary value. Monetary compensation can offer financial support to the grieving family, but it cannot truly replace the affection, care, and warmth provided by a mother or wife to her family."


In its ruling, the court directed the insurance company to provide Rs 15.95 lakh as compensation, thereby granting the petition.

Previously, the MACT had awarded compensation of Rs 17.38 lakh to claimants for the loss of family members in a motor accident. In response, the insurance company contested the granted compensation pertaining to the deceased homemaker. The insurance company argued that the MACT incorrectly calculated her notional income based on the Minimum Wages Act.

The company asserted that the MACT had failed to deduct any amount for personal expenses and had added 25% to assume future income increase while computing "loss of dependency."

The court concluded that, in the absence of evidence, courts must determine the notional income of the injured based on minimum wages outlined in the Minimum Wages Act. Therefore, the court ruled that the MACT had correctly computed the notional income.