Homemaker's role as important as role of earning members in family: Supreme Court

The role of a homemaker in a family is as important as a family member who earns "tangible" income, observed the Supreme Court recently [Arvind Kumar Pandey and ors vs Girish Pandey and anr]..A bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan acknowledged that it is hard to quantify the contributions of homemakers, but proceeded to emphasise that these contributions were of high value. ."It goes without saying that the role of a homemaker is as important as that of a family member whose income is tangible as a source of livelihood for the family. The activities performed by a home-maker, if counted one by one, there will hardly be any doubt that the contribution of a home-maker is of a high order and invaluable," the Court said. .The Court made the observation while enhancing the compensation payable for the death of a woman-homemaker who passed away in 2006 after a vehicle accident. The Court noted that while assessing such compensation in insurance cases, a homemaker's income cannot be assumed to be less than the amount payable to a daily wage worker."Her direct and indirect monthly income, in no circumstances, could be less than the wages admissible to a daily wager in the State of Uttarakhand under the Minimum Wages Act," the Court said. .The deceased woman's family had initially filed a petition seeking compensation of ₹16,85,000 before a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT). In the first round of litigation, the MACT refused the allow the claim after noting that the vehicle was not insured. After the Uttarakhand High Court remanded the matter back to the Tribunal, the MACT awarded a sum of ₹2,50,000 as compensation. This award was upheld by the High Court in April 2017. The family of the deceased woman then filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. .The top court noted that the High Court's judgment was full of factual and legal errors."Taking into consideration all the attending circumstances, it appears to us that the monthly income of the deceased, at the relevant time, could not be less than Rs. 4,000/- p.m. or so," the Supreme Court proceeded to find. However, instead of calculating and awarding the compensation under different heads, the apex court eventually granted a lump sum compensation of ₹6,00,000 (rupees six lakhs). The appeal was disposed of on these terms. .Advocates Omprakash Ajitsingh Parihar, Abhijeet Shah, Dushyant Tiwari, and Arvind Kumar appeared for the kin of the deceased woman.Advocates Ashwarya Sinha, Govind Rishi, and Priyanka Sinha represented the respondents, led by one Girish Pandey..[Read order]