Homemaker’s job multifarious: Punjab and Haryana High Court hikes accident payout to Rs 16.9 lakh over woman’s death

Justice Harkesh Manuja was hearing a batch of petitions originating from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on June 21, 2009.

“The notional income of a housewife needs to be considered, keeping in mind multifarious services rendered by her for the family; the expenses for cook service, maid servant service, housekeeping expenses and keeping in mind the savings accrued due to all these services,” the Punjab and Haryana High Court said on April 18.

The order stated that even the invaluable emotional support and the contribution of a housewife to her husband, children and in-laws cannot be assessed in terms of money.

Background

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was hearing a batch of pleas following a motor vehicle accident on June 21, 2009, which resulted in the death of a woman and caused significant injuries to two others.

Following the incident, the relatives of the deceased woman and the other two victims filed claims before the MACT, Panipat. On December 1, 2010, the tribunal passed an award of Rs 4.55 lakh in favour of the woman.

While the respondent insurance company did not dispute the occurrence of the accident or the negligence of the offending vehicle, the claimants found the awarded sums inadequate and sought legal recourse before the high court.

Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Piyush Aggarwal and Saurabh Garg contended before the Punjab and Haryana High Court that the impugned award suffered from serious infirmities. They submitted that the income of the deceased was erroneously assessed at Rs 5,000 per month, despite cogent evidence on record demonstrating that the deceased was earning Rs 16,000 per month.

Court’s other findings

• A perusal of the record reveals that one of the injured appellant/claimant was working as a teacher in a school, but no documentary evidence was produced on record to prove the same, the Punjab and Haryana High Court noted.
• Even otherwise, it stands duly proved that the appellant sustained grievous injuries in the accident, on account of which she remained an outpatient till September 15, 2009 and was incapacitated for a considerable period, rendering her unable to attend her avocation.
• In such circumstances, the absence of documentary proof could not have been a ground to deny just compensation, particularly when the nature of injuries and period of treatment clearly established loss of earnings during the period of rehabilitation.
• In the case of Laxmidhar Nayak v. Jugal Kishore Behera, the notional income of housewife-cum-agricultural labourer, who died in 1991, was considered as Rs 4,500 per month, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stated.
• Even in the case of National Insurance Co Ltd v. Dhan Singh, the notional income of the housewife was assessed at Rs 11,000 per month by this court while awarding compensation in relation to an accident dated 20.09.2017.
• Keeping in mind the considerations, the notional income of the deceased as housewife-cum-seamstress could not be assessed less than Rs 8,000 per month against an accident which took place on 21.06.2009.