Step forward: On the Shishupal judgment

📌 Summary:

• A Supreme Court Division Bench (Justices Sanjay Karol & N.K. Singh) in Shishupal @Shish Ram vs Surjeet revised motor-accident compensation for a 2001 road-accident victim (Reshma) from ₹8.43 lakh (Punjab & Haryana HC, 2024) to ₹62.78 lakh

• The Court attached ₹30,000/month "economic value" to the deceased homemaker's unpaid domestic service

• Legal reasoning: a homemaker's work cannot be discounted merely because it is unpaid or performed by women; the ₹30,000 floor is notional, to be hiked 10% every three years, with a woman's salary (where applicable) added on top

• Precedents: Lata Wadhwa (2001) valued homemaker services at a modest ₹3,000; Kirti vs Oriental Insurance (2021) held unpaid work has economic value — but quantification remained inconsistent

• Limits: ruling applies only to MACT compensation; it creates no salary, pension or employment relationship for homemakers

• Ripple effects: connects to the suppressed female labour-force participation debate; aids homemakers' maintenance claims under the Hindu Marriage Act; rural women's farm labour (sowing, harvesting, cattle-tending) can be valued higher; future litigation may test male homemakers' claims; insurers may revise risk models as average claim sizes rise (likely applied retrospectively)

🎯 UPSC Relevance: GS1 — Indian Society / role of women and the valuation of women's unpaid work; intersects with GS2 (judiciary) and labour economics.

📝 Prelims Facts:

• Case: Shishupal @Shish Ram vs Surjeet (2026); Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and N.K. Singh

• Compensation revised to ₹62.78 lakh; homemaker value ₹30,000/month, +10% every 3 years

• Precedents: Lata Wadhwa (2001), Kirti vs Oriental Insurance (2021); body: Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT)

🔑 Key Term: Notional income — an imputed monetary value assigned to non-monetised work (e.g., a homemaker's labour) for computing legal compensation.