Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 20 To November 26, 2023

Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1142 to 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

NOMINAL INDEX

Filo Edtech Inc v. Union of India & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

Dr Reddys Laboratories Limited v. Smart Laboratories Pvt Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

Court on its own motion v. M/s Obssiobn Naaz & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

PCIT Versus M/S Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. VICKY AGGARWAL AND ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

Rihan v. The State (GNCTD) 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION V/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1148

Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Versus ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1149

Trusted Info Systems Private Limited v. Indian Computer Emergency Response Team & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1150

X v. Y 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1151

M/S PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (CONCESSIONAIRE OF DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION) v. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1152

Scrum Alliance, Inc v. Mr. Prem Kumar S. & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1153

SHRI NARESH KUMAR V/s THE WIRE & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1154

Prasanta Karmakar v. Paralympic Committee of India through its Chariman & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1155

SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

Neelu Kumari & Ors v. Om & Anr (Bajaj Alliance Gen Ins Co Ltd) 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1157

Aman Hospitality Pvt Ltd v. Orient Lites 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1158

Varun v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1159

Pooja vs State Of Gnct Of Delhi & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1160

AJAY KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS. v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1161

SUJAAT ALI (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS v. GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T OF DELHI & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1162

CHHAYA TYAGI v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1163

MAJIBULLAH MOHAMMAD HANEEF v. UNION OF INDIA 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1164

TARUN KUMAR v. PARMANAND GARG 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1165

BDR Finvest Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1166

Metal Engineering and Forging Company v. Central Warehousing Corporation 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1167

Italian Thai Development v. NTPC Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1168

LAXMI KOHLU GHAR THROUGH ITS PARTNER SH ARUN KUMAR v. CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS AND TRADE MARKS AND REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1169

RAJINDER SINGH CHADHA v. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1170

Mis Deco Industries India v. JM Financial Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd through its AO Kumar Gaurav & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1171

Preeti v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

Can A Patent Office Assign A Patent Application Filed Before It To Another Patent Office? Delhi High Court Asks

Case Title: Filo Edtech Inc v. Union of India & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

Hearing a case where an application seeking grant of patent, filed before the Bombay Patent Office, was assigned to the Delhi Patent Office, the Delhi High Court on Thursday posed two interesting questions – (i) whether such practice was permissible, and (ii) if permissible, whether it precluded an unsuccessful applicant from filing an appeal before the Delhi High Court.

Statedly, after the appellant’s patent application was assigned to the Delhi Patent Office, not only did the examination took place at Delhi, but also the First Examination Report (FER) was issued at Delhi.

Can't Expect Every Doctor To Know Distinction Between 'Aziwok' And 'Aziwake': Delhi High Court Grants Injunction In Favour Of Dr. Reddy's

Case Title: Dr Reddys Laboratories Limited v. Smart Laboratories Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

Finding a prima facie case of infringement, the Delhi High Court recently granted injunction in favour of Dr. Reddy’s-AZIWOK against defendant’s AZIWAKE, noting that the minuscule difference between the two words was too slight to detract from the overall phonetic similarity between them.

“To the ear of the consumer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection, it is, therefore, clear that the words “AZIWOK” and “AZIWAKE” are phonetically deceptively similar,” the court said.

Delhi High Court Says Contempt Action For Attack On Local Commissioners Maintainable As They Are Extension Of Court

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. M/s Obssiobn Naaz & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

During the hearing of a criminal contempt case initiated in respect of a violent attack on Local Commissioners (LCs) out for inspection in 2014, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court opined that LCs are an extension of the court, and as such, it had jurisdiction to initiate/continue contempt proceedings.

Reassessment Notice Severed At Old Address Despite Knowing Assessee’s New Address: Delhi High Court Quashes Assessment Order

Case Title: PCIT Versus M/S Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

The Delhi High Court has quashed the assessment order as the notice under Section 148 was improperly served as it was sent to the old address, despite the fact that the department was aware of the new address.

The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has observed that no notice, under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, was issued to the respondent or assessee before framing the assessment order. Thus, the assessment order, which has been framed without a notice being issued to the respondent or assessee under Section 143(2), is unsustainable in law.

Delhi High Court Directs BCD To Take Action Against Lawyer If Found Guilty Of ‘Manufacturing’ Order Purportedly Passed By IPAB

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. VICKY AGGARWAL AND ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

The Delhi High Court has directed the Bar Council of Delhi to take action against a lawyer if he is found guilty of "manufacturing" an order purportedly passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in 2016.

A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shailender Kaur however discharged the clients who engaged the lawyer to represent their case before the Board after an unconditional apology was tendered for any inconvenience caused to the court, with an undertaking that they shall be careful while filing any document in judicial proceedings in future.

Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Murdering Wife, Reiterates Ligature Marks In Case Of Hanging Different From Strangulation

Case Title: Rihan v. The State (GNCTD)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man being prosecuted under Sections 302 (murder), 498A (cruelty) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) IPC, in relation to his wife’s death.

“In view of the categoric opinion of the doctor that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, it prima facie, appears that the medical evidence is not in accord with the prosecution version”, it said.

Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Conduct Exercise For Improving Infrastructure Of Its Hospitals

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION V/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1148

The Delhi High Court has directed the Union Government to undertake an exercise for improvement of infrastructure of the hospitals being controlled and run by it in the national capital.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna also directed the Delhi Government to file an action taken report stating as to whether the recommendations of the expert committee, which was constituted to enhance operational standards and treatment methodologies within government hospitals, are being implemented.

Seized Cash Should Be Treated As Advance Tax As Per Law, There Was No Default In Payment Of Advance: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Versus ACIT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1149

The Delhi High Court has held that the seized cash was offered by the assessee, under the regime that was prevailing then, to be treated as the advance tax, and thus there was no default in payment of the advance. Although its payment or adjustment was triggered due to a search action,

The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has observed that the petitioner had offered Rs. 50 lakhs seized in search to be treated as advance tax. This endorsement is found both in the return on investment (ROI) as well as in the computation sheet accompanying the ROI.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Challenge To CERT-IN’s Empanelment Procedure, Reiterates That Courts Ought Not Sit In Appeal Over Expert Decisions

Case Title: Trusted Info Systems Private Limited v. Indian Computer Emergency Response Team & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1150

Justice Subramonium Prasad of the Delhi High Court recently dismissed a litigant’s challenge to the procedure adopted by Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-IN) w.r.t. empanelment of cyber-security firms as IT security auditing organizations.

It was observed that, “…the process of empanelment adopted by the Respondents is extremely technical. The Court cannot be expected to sit on appeal over decisions taken by experts and substitute its own conclusion with one arrived at by the experts.”

Maintenance Provision Under Hindu Marriage Act Is Gender Neutral: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1151

The Delhi High Court has said that the provision for grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses to a spouse under the Hindu Marriage Act is gender neutral.

A division bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said that the spouse having a reasonable capacity of earning but who chooses to remain unemployed and idle without any sufficient explanation or indicating sincere efforts to gain employment should not be permitted to saddle the other party with one sided responsibility of meeting out the expenses.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Municipal Corporation Order Directing Pacific Mall Not To Charge Parking Fee From Visitors

Title: M/S PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (CONCESSIONAIRE OF DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION) v. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1152

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order issued by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) in 2018 directing city’s Pacific Mall not to charge parking fee from the visitors.

A division bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan observed that the charging of parking fee by the mall does not violate the Unified Building Byelaws for Delhi, 2016, or the Master Plan for Delhi, 2021.

S.76(3) Trademarks Act Does Not Require Both Rival Marks To Be Registered CTMs, Targeted Client Base Relevant To Infringement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Scrum Alliance, Inc v. Mr. Prem Kumar S. & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1153

In an application filed by a leading Scrum certification organization, the Delhi High Court yesterday granted interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from using the plaintiff’s mark “CERTIFIED SCRUM MASTER” as well as its logo.

The plaintiff, being registered proprietor of Certification Trade Marks (CTMs) “CERTIFIED SCRUMMASTER”, “CSM” and certain device marks, had filed the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, claiming that defendants were using marks and logo deceptively similar to that of its own.

Delhi Chief Secretary Gets Interim Relief, High Court Directs ‘The Wire’ To Take Down Alleged Defamatory Article Over Bamnoli Land Acquisition

Title: SHRI NARESH KUMAR V/s THE WIRE & ORS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1154

The Delhi High Court has directed news portal 'The Wire' to take down its article on city’s Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar casting aspersions on him in relation to his involvement in an alleged land acquisition case.

The suit has been filed against the news report titled “Links of Son of Delhi Chief Secretary to Beneficiary's Family in Land Over-Valuation Case Raise Questions”. The story was published on November 09 by reporter Meetu Jain.

Suspension Of Para Swimmer Prasanta Karmakar Accused Of Recording Videos Of Female Swimmers Upheld By Delhi High Court

Case Title: Prasanta Karmakar v. Paralympic Committee of India through its Chariman & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1155

Justice Subramonium Prasad of the Delhi High Court on Monday upheld the 3-year suspension order passed by Paralympic Committee of India in respect of Arjuna Awardee Paralympic Swimmer Prasanta Karmakar, observing that he failed to showcase how the decision of the Disciplinary Committee was unfair.

Reiterating that the scope of judicial review over administrative decisions was limited, the court said,

“It is well settled that when a statute/law/bye-law gives a discretion to an administration to take a decision, the scope of judicial review remains limited and it is not permissible, unless the decision is contrary to law or has been taken without considering the relevant factors or where irrelevant factors have been considered or the decision is one which a prudent man would not have arrived at.”

Depriving Furlough To Convict Undergoing Long Term Imprisonment Is Counterproductive To Reformative Approach: Delhi High Court

Title: SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

The Delhi High Court has observed that depriving furlough to a convict, who is undergoing long term imprisonment, would be counterproductive to the reformative approach and would also take away the motivation to maintain good conduct inside the jail.

Justice Amit Bansal said that only on the basis that the convict has committed a gruesome crime many years ago, it cannot be said that the individual’s temporary release on furlough would be against the interest of the society.

Murder Of Employee Doesn't Disentitle Legal Heirs From Claiming Compensation Under Employees’ Compensation Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Neelu Kumari & Ors v. Om & Anr (Bajaj Alliance Gen Ins Co Ltd)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1157

In an appeal filed under Section 30 of the Employees’ Compensation (EC) Act, the Delhi High Court has reiterated that the fact of an employee being murdered during the course of employment does not disentitle his legal heirs from seeking compensation under the Act.

“…the finding by the Commissioner that murder of an employee during the course of performance of his duties would not bring the case within the ambit of Section 2(1)(n) of the E.C. Act, is flawed. For which reliance can be placed on decision in Rita Devi Vs. New India Insurance Company Ltd., as also decision by this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Munesh Devi.”

Party Cannot Contest Arbitral Award For Exceeding Reference Scope If It Failed To Object When Alleged Breach Initially Occurred: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Aman Hospitality Pvt Ltd v. Orient Lites

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1158

The Delhi High Court has held that a party cannot challenge an arbitral award on the ground that the tribunal went beyond the scope of reference when it admittedly did not raise any objection when the alleged breach was first committed by the tribunal.

The bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held that the tribunal’s decision to include certain invoices in the claim cannot be challenged under Section 34 as being beyond the reference to arbitration when no such objection was raised before the arbitral tribunal.

Delhi HC Denies Interim Bail To Murder-Accused For Attending PhD Classes, Says Options Available In Judicial Custody To Pursue Educational Goals

Case Title: Varun v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1159

The Delhi High Court has denied prayer of a murder-accused for interim bail to pursue regular PhD classes, noting the gravity of the stated offence and allegations that the complainant had been threatened.

“Undoubtedly, every individual has the right to pursue the education but in the present case the petitioner is an accused of a serious offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and has to be dealt accordingly looking into the gravity of offence.”

Delhi High Court Orders Release Of ₹1 Crore Ex-Gratia Compensation To Kin Of Constable Amit Kumar Who Died On COVID-19 Duty

Title: Pooja vs State Of Gnct Of Delhi & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1160

The Delhi High Court recently ordered release of Rs. 1 crore ex-gratia compensation to the wife and father of 31-year-old constable Amit Kumar who passed away during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic while performing his duties.

Noting that the Delhi Government has agreed to release the ex gratia payment, Justice Prathiba M Singh directed:

“The amount in terms of the Cabinet Decision dated 3rd November, 2023 shall now be released to the Petitioner and the father of the deceased within four weeks.”

Delhi High Court Grants Last Opportunity To Govt To Constitute Delhi Pharmacy Council

Title: AJAY KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS. v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1161

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to constitute Delhi Pharmacy Council within two weeks, as a last and final opportunity.

Justice Prathiba M Singh was dealing with a plea moved by members of the Delhi Pharmacy Council. concerning notifying the results of election of the Council held on November 02, 2021.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Motor Accident Tribunal's Order To Exhume Deceased's Body For DNA Test To Verify Legal Heirs

Title: SUJAAT ALI (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS v. GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1162

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal directing that the grave of a deceased man be dug up to conduct a DNA test for verifying the claim of compensation by various individuals asserting to be his legal heirs.

Justice Navin Chawla allowed the petition moved by persons claiming to be legal heirs of the deceased Sujaat Ali, who passed away in a motor vehicle accident. They challenged the Tribunal’s order dated December 12, 2022.

High Court Rejects Judge’s Plea Seeking Transfer From DU’s 2-Yr LLM Course To 3-Yrs Course Owing To Her Employment

Title: CHHAYA TYAGI v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1163

The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition moved by a judge seeking her transfer from two-year LLM to the three-year course offered by the Delhi University in order to complete her ongoing studies on account of her employment as a judicial officer.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said that the three year LL.M. course offered by the varsity is specially designed for people who are employed but it does not stipulate that if any student attains employment in the middle of two year course, he or she can take the advantage of three year course to continue the studies alongwith the employment.

Delhi High Court Upholds Extradition Of Man Charged With Murder Of Family In Oman

Title: MAJIBULLAH MOHAMMAD HANEEF v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1164

The Delhi High Court has upheld the Union Government’s decision to extradite a man charged with murder of a family, including three minor children, in Oman.

Justice Amit Bansal dismissed the petition moved by the accused, Majibullah Mohammad Haneef, challenging a trial court order recommending his extradition to Oman for facing murder trial.

When Tenant Is Evicted For Bonafide Use, Courts Should Refrain From Prescribing Guidelines For Landlord’s Residential Choices: Delhi High Court

Title: TARUN KUMAR v. PARMANAND GARG

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1165

Granting relief to a landlord who evicted a tenant from his shop for setting up a business for his wife which constitutes as a “bona fide requirement”, the Delhi High Court has said that courts should refrain from prescribing any standard or guidelines for the residential choices of a landlord.

Emphasizing that the tenant cannot dictate as to how the landlord must utilize the property, Justice Jasmeet Singh said:

“The landlord possesses the prerogative to determine their specific requirements, exercising full autonomy in this regard. It is not within the purview of the courts to impose directives on the landlord regarding the nature or quality of their chosen usage of the tenanted premises. Essentially, the courts should refrain from prescribing any standard or guidelines for the landlord's residential choices.”

No Recovery Towards TAS Can Be Made Towards Deductee Even If Deductor Is Undergoing CIRP: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BDR Finvest Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1166

The Delhi High Court has held that no recovery towards Tax at Source (TAS) can be made towards the deductee even if the deductor is undergoing the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

Loss Of Goodwill Is Difficult To Prove, Cannot Be Proved With Mathematical Precision: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Metal Engineering and Forging Company v. Central Warehousing Corporation

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1167

The Delhi High Court has held that it would be difficult for any party claiming loss of goodwill to prove or establish the same with any mathematical precision.

The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan upheld an arbitral award wherein the arbitrator allowed a party to retain certain amount as penalty, being the genuine pre-estimate of the loss of goodwill without any proof of quantum of actual loss suffered by it.

Court Can’t Grant Unconditional Stay Of Arbitral Award Unless Prima Facie Case Of Fraud: Delhi High Court

Cas Title: Italian Thai Development v. NTPC Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1168

The Delhi High Court has held that the Court cannot grant unconditional stay on an arbitration award under Section 36(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, unless a prima facie case is made out that making of the award is marred by fraud.

‘Brief Order’ Of Advertisement Before Acceptance Of Mark Must Be Available On Trade Mark Registry’s Portal For Litigants’ Reference: Delhi High Court

Title: LAXMI KOHLU GHAR THROUGH ITS PARTNER SH ARUN KUMAR v. CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS AND TRADE MARKS AND REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1169

The Delhi High Court has observed that a brief order which has to be passed at the time of directing advertisement before acceptance of a mark should be made available on the online portal of the Trade Marks Registry for reference of the litigants.

Justice Prathiba M Singh said that in case such a brief order is not uploaded for all the trademark applications, a copy of the same should still be made available upon litigant’s request via email.

‘Scheduled Offence’ Cannot Exist After Quashing Of FIR: Delhi High Court Quashes PMLA Proceedings

Title: RAJINDER SINGH CHADHA v. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1170

The Delhi High Court has quashed PMLA proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against an accused, on the basis of two FIRs registered against him- that were later quashed and compounded after settlement between the parties.

Justice Amit Sharma said that a scheduled offence, after an FIR has been quashed, cannot exist and therefore, if there is no scheduled offence, there can be no offence of money laundering with respect to the same.

Debt Recovery | Extension Of Interim Relief At The Time Of Remand Subject To Prima Facie Finding In Petitioner's Favor: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mis Deco Industries India v. JM Financial Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd through its AO Kumar Gaurav & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1171

The Delhi High Court recently held that an interim order granted by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal ("DRAT") during the pendency of appeal was not required to be extended in pursuance of remand, without a prima facie finding on the need for such an order.

Delhi High Court Allows Plea Of Manual Scavenger’s Widow For Increase In Compensation From 10 To 30 Lacs

Case Title: Preeti v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

The Delhi High Court has allowed plea of a sanitation worker’s widow for enhancement of compensation from Rs.10 lacs to 30 lacs, based on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Balram Singh v. Union of India & Ors., whereby directions were issued w.r.t. compensation of dependents of victims who have lost their lives in manual scavenging.

The petitioner had approached the court assailing grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.10 lacs. Besides enhancement in compensation, she had sought a direction to concerned agencies to provide her full rehabilitation including employment, as well as education to her children and skill training in terms of the decision in Balram Singh.