‘Homemaker’ is a gender-neutral term: What did the Karnataka High Court say?

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

In the opinion of the Karnataka High Court, even a working woman or a professional can be considered a home maker so long as such woman renders services at home taking care and looking after the welfare of the family members. Image for representation only | Photo Credit: Reuters

The story so far : The High Court of Karnataka, in a judgment arising out of a motor accident compensation dispute with Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) in a 2013 bus accident, has said that “Any individual who tirelessly strives, showers unconditional love, sacrifices personal comfort at times and ultimately becomes a pillar for happy and stable family is a homemaker.”

The case arose out of a motor vehicle accident in 2013. The claimant suffered injuries and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Bengaluru awarded her ₹4.55 lakh in compensation. Both the claimant and the KSRTC appealed against the decision. The claimant is an educated woman with a Master’s in Biotechnology and had previously worked as a guest lecturer. But there was no evidence that she was employed when the accident occurred.

The KSRTC argued that having such a higher educational qualification, she cannot be regarded as a homemaker. The claimant submitted that the disability, which is permanent in nature, had affected her ability to perform her responsibilities and that fact should be considered while determining compensation.

The court observed that every woman who renders services to her family members at home is liable to be regarded as a “homemaker” irrespective of the fact that she holds higher a qualification, let it be a degree, postgraduate degree or a doctorate.

In the opinion of the court, even a working woman or a professional can be considered a home maker so long as such woman renders services at home taking care and looking after the welfare of the family members.

To consider a woman “homemaker”, it is not necessary to project or establish that she is illiterate or she stays at home or that she attends only household work and nothing more.

Any individual who tirelessly strives, showers unconditional love, sacrifices personal comfort at times and ultimately becomes the pillar for a happy and stable family is a homemaker. These qualities are illustrative but not exhaustive.

The court noted that the word ‘homemaker’ is gender-neutral. A homemaker thus can be male or female. It also covers working person or bread winner or wage earner. Therefore, the court held that the claimant in this case can well be considered a home maker.

The court took her notional income as ₹8,000 per month, based on the notional income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the relevant period.

The court enhanced the compensation by ₹1,96,800 which is ₹1,72,800 towards future financial loss arising from her permanent disability and ₹24,000 for the three months during which she was unable to perform her household responsibilities.

Earlier this June 2026, the Supreme court in the matter of Shishu Pal @ Shish Ram & Ors. v.