The services of a homemaker possess inherent pecuniary value and must be recognized when determining compensation in motor accident claims, ensuring notional income is realistic and inclusive of future prospects and conventional heads.

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants–claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bathinda (hereinafter “the Tribunal”), vide award dated 06.06.2003, whereby a sum of ₹1,51,200/- was granted on account of the death of Balbir Kaur, wife of the appellant No.1, due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the impugned award suffers from patent illegality inasmuch as the learned Tribunal has awarded wholly inadequate compensation despite recording a categorical finding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by respondent No.1 and that the deceased succumbed to the injuries suffered therein. Further it was submitted that the income of the deceased has been assessed on the lower side without appreciating that she was contributing to the family not only by performing household work but also by earning through sale of milk. Furthermore, it is urged that the deduction towards personal expenses is excessive in view of the number of dependents, and the multiplier applied is contrary to settled principles applicable to the age of the deceased, thereby resulting in reduced compensation. Additionally, it was contended that the overall computation is not in consonance with the evidence on record. Consequently, the compensation awarded deserves enhancement. Lastly, it was argued that no amount has been awarded under conventional heads such as funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of estate, to which the appellants are legally entitled. Reliance has been placed on Lata Wadhwa and Others vs. State of Bihar and Others , (2001) 8 SCC 197; Naresh Kumar and Others vs. The New India Assurance Company Limited and Another 2025:PHHC:127459.

3. At the outset, learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any irregularity or infirmity, and that the findings recorded therein are well-reasoned on the basis of the material available before the learned Tribunal. It was accordingly contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeal.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record, with their able assistance.

5. The findings of the learned Tribunal with respect to the age of the deceased are affirmed. However, the learned tribunal has completely omitted future prospects, the assessment of notional income is on the lesser side and no award under conventional heads has been given by the learned Tribunal. Consequently the quantum of compensation deserves to be reassessed in the light of the settled principles governing motor accident claims with respect to the death of a home maker.

6. While examining the question regarding the income of the deceased, it is noticed that the learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at ₹2,100/- per month, primarily on the ground that she was a housewife and there was no documentary evidence on record to establish that she was earning by selling milk. However, such an assessment appears to be wholly unrealistic and contrary to the settled principles governing determination of compensation in cases involving the death of homemaker. It is now well settled that the contribution made by a housewife towards the family cannot be treated as having negligible or no pecuniary value.

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in FAO-4806-2017, Shilpa Jain