Skip to main content

Madras High Court fixes notional salary of homemaker at Rs. 3500

How much should a homemaker be paid? Or can we even measure her worth?

A division bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justice Prabha Sridevan and Justice T.S. Sivagnanam, has declared: ‘The time has come to scientifically assess the value of the unpaid homemaker, both in accident claims and in division of matrimonial property’.

The case: Compensation was claimed for a couple killed in an accident. What was the woman worth? The judges said: “One cannot ignore... that the homemaker, by applying herself to the tasks at home, liberates her spouse to devote his energy, time and attention to… generate property for the family”. Fixing the notional income of the woman at Rs. 3,500, they awarded Rs. 7.6 lakh to her daughter. “Homemakers too should be considered earning members,” they said.

How do you put a number to what a homemaker does? The judges suggested (a) what she would have earned had she not remained at home, (b) if marriage is an equal economic partnership, the homemaker’s salary is half her husband’s, (c) how much it would cost to replace the homemaker with paid workers. The Motor Vehicles Act puts it at a third of what a spouse gets. Ha! Planning to submit a bill to the spouse? Even if it is a modest one, be careful to hand it over with an anti-shock pill.

There’s no formula to calculate the homemakers’ value / contribution. The Supreme Court in 2001 fixed Rs. 3,000 as the notional income of homemakers.


Comments

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...