Supreme Court assigns economic value to unpaid domestic work
The Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Shishupal @Shish Ram vs Surjeet has assigned an economic value of ₹30,000 per month to a homemaker's unpaid domestic work, revising compensation in a motor accident case. This ruling, building on previous judgments like Lata Wadhwa (2001) and Kirti vs Oriental Insurance (2021), normalizes the societal tendency to undervalue women's work. While not creating a salary or pension scheme, it provides judicial reasoning for valuing domestic labor in compensation calculations and could influence maintenance claims under the Hindu Marriage Act. The additive rule, which suggests hiking the floor value by 10% every three years, may also impact motor insurance risk models and encourage quicker claim settlements. This judgment is seen as a vital corrective to decades of economic erasure of women's contributions.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court has assigned an economic value of ₹30,000 per month to a homemaker's unpaid domestic work in a motor accident compensation case.
- This landmark judgment aims to correct the undervaluation of women's contributions in the household sphere.
- The ruling, while not creating a salary, provides a precedent for valuing domestic labor in legal contexts like maintenance claims.
- The "additive rule" for increasing the floor value over time could influence insurance claims and settlements.
Exam Facts
- Case: Shishupal @Shish Ram vs Surjeet.
- Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and N.K. Singh.
- Economic value assigned: ₹30,000 per month.
- Previous cases: Lata Wadhwa (2001), Kirti vs Oriental Insurance (2021).
- Hindu Marriage Act.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.