Delhi HC - Compensation For The Death Of A Homemaker Requires Holistic Approach, Can’t Be Calculated Based On MWA 1948

The Delhi High Court recently made observations regarding the difficulty of quantifying monetary compensation for the death of a homemaker-woman. The court recognized that such compensation cannot truly compensate for the love, care, and warmth provided by the deceased to her family. Deciding on compensation for the death of a homemaker requires a comprehensive approach, considering the various gratuitous services she provided to her family. 

Justice Gaurang Kanth addressed an argument claiming that the notional income of a homemaker could not be calculated based on the Minimum Wages Act due to the absence of income and education proofs. The court was hearing an appeal by an insurance company against an order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). 

The MACT had awarded compensation to the claimants, who were three children and the mother of the deceased individuals, for their loss in a motor accident. The insurance company contested the compensation granted to the deceased homemaker, arguing that her notional income was wrongly computed based on the Minimum Wages Act. They argued that the compensation of ₹17.38 lakh was unreasonable. 

The court, considering previous Supreme Court judgments, acknowledged the essential role played by a homemaker in a family but also recognized the difficulty in quantifying this role in monetary terms. It affirmed that no amount of money could replace the love, care, and warmth provided by a mother or wife. 

The court noted that in the absence of evidence, notional income had to be determined based on the minimum wages notified under the Minimum Wages Act, and it found no fault with the MACT's computation of notional income. 

Referring to a previous case, the court determined that 40 percent of the established income of the deceased should be granted under the head "Future Prospects" instead of the 25% awarded by the MACT. After making deductions for personal expenses, the court fixed the compensation at ₹15.95 lakhs and directed the differential amount to be returned to the insurance company. 

In conclusion, the court emphasized the difficulty in assessing the value of a homemaker's services in monetary terms and recognized that no compensation could adequately replace the invaluable contributions she made to her family.