To address this gap, a Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice NK Singh directed that in cases involving the death of a homemaker, tribunals and courts should award a composite sum under the new head of “loss of domestic care”. The amount has been fixed at ₹30,000 per month, subject to a cumulative 10 per cent increase every three years.
The Bench delivered the ruling while enhancing compensation in a 2001 accident case from Haryana, where a homemaker died in a road accident.
On questions related to the value of her work, the court observed that the contribution of a homemaker extends far beyond conventional notions of income. “When in Indian society, the ‘woman of the house’ is called the ‘grihaswamini’, then why are we still groping in the dark,” it said.
According to the court, the new head of “loss of domestic care” covers three distinct losses: The homemaker's contribution to the smooth functioning of the household; the loss of maternal support to children; and the loss of spousal or filial support suffered by the husband and parents.
“It is in these circumstances that we deem it appropriate” to introduce the new head of compensation, the Bench said, adding that it seeks to overcome the “inherent disadvantage” faced by homemakers when compensation is calculated on the basis of conservatively assessed notional income.
The judgment described homemakers as “the building blocks for the nation’s road to holistic progress” and noted that their labour, though largely confined within the home, enables the productive contribution of husbands and children to society and the economy.
The court held that compensation calculations based on conservative beliefs of notional income fail to capture the true worth of homemakers. “The role of the homemaker is neither entirely economic nor entirely non-economic, and blends the factors of economy with emotional and managerial contributions,” it said.
The court further observed that consortium compensation primarily addresses emotional loss and does not adequately account for the economic contribution of homemakers. The ruling, it said, is “a step against the systematic undervaluing of the work performed by women”.
The ruling came in an appeal against a 2024 judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court arising out of a fatal road accident in 2001. The accident involved a collision between two Jeeps in which a woman lost her life.
The High Court had awarded compensation of more than ₹8 lakh to her husband and three children.
Apart from recognising domestic care as a separate compensable loss, the Supreme Court also issued directions aimed at speeding up the disposal of motor accident compensation cases.
It called upon the chief justices of all high courts to oversee the progress of such matters and ensure adherence to the statutory framework governing their adjudication.
* ₹30,000 amonth compensation fixed under the new head, with a 10% increase every three years
* Compensation to cover loss of household care, maternal support and spousal support
* Consortiumcompensation alone held insufficient to reflect a homemaker’s contribution
 "SC, Supreme Court")