IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIC.ATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR *** S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1104/98 (Kailash & Anr. V/s. Bachchoo Singh & Ors.) Date of Judgment :: 19.03.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S. CHAUHAN Mr. L.L. Gupta for the appellant. Mr. B.N. Sandu for the respondents. A husband and a son have challenged the award dated 01.07.1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sawaimadhopur, (for short, 'the learned Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal had granted compensation of Rs.1,46,980/- along with interest @ 12% per annum. Briefly, the facts of case are that on 17.07.1997, around 4'o clock in the evening, Smt. Shanti Devi, the deceased, had gone to the boring well for fetching water for her family. While she was returning back, on foot, to her house, a truck, bearing registration No.RJ-25-G-0439, being driven in rash and negligent manner, came and hit her. Consequently, she suffered grave injuries. Subsequently, she expired. Since, the husband had lost his wife and the son had lost his mother, both of them had filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. In support of their case, they examined two witnesses and submitted four documents. The respondent-Insurance Company examined a single witness and submitted two documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal had granted a compensation as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. Mr. L.L. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant, has contended that besides working as a labourer and earning Rs.930/- per month, the deceased was also a housewife. According to the judgment delivered in the case of Shankar Lal & Ors. V/s. R.S.R.T.C. & Ors. [2001 (2) WLC 471], a Division Bench of this Court had held that the work done by a housewife should be quantified as Rs.1,000/- per month. Hence, according to the learned counsel, besides the income actually earned by the deceased, her contribution as a housewife to the tune of Rs.1,000/- should also be added and treated as part of the income she would have brought into the family. Hence, while calculating the “loss of dependency”, after deducting one-third from the amount as Rs.930/-, her income should have been taken as Rs.1,000/-+Rs.620/-. He has further supported his arguments by relying upon a judgment in the case of Shimbu Dayal & Ors. V/s. Sohan Lal & Ors. (S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.636/1997, decided on 27.02.2007). On the other hand, Mr. B.N. Sandu, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, has supported the impugned award. We have heard both the learned counsels for the parties and have perused the impugned award. In an era of gender justice and women empowerment, one cannot ignore the economic contribution made by a housewife to her family. Although, the housewife cannot earn money for the family, but nonetheless the work done by her for raising the family is economically quantifiable. In the case of Shankar Lal & Ors. (supra), this Court had quantified the economic contribution by a housewife as Rs.1,000/- per month. The said decision was also relied by this Court in the case of Shimbu Dayal & Ors. (supra). Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in holding that although the deceased was a working woman, her economic contribution as a housewife should be considered and calculated. Keeping these principles in mind, this Court has no hesitation in re-assessing the “loss of dependency” as Rs.1,620/-X17X12 =Rs.3,30,480/-. Hence, the impugned award dated 01.07.1998 is modified as under : (a) the loss of dependency should be calculated as Rs.1,620/-X17X12=3,30,480/-. (b) the rest of the award dated 01.07.1998 is confirmed and this appeal is allowed. (c) The learned tribunal is directed to ensure that the appellants are granted the enhanced compensation amount alongwith interest within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (R.S. CHAUHAN),J A.Asopa/-