Section 16(1)(a) Companies Act: Central Government Can Act on Information, Application Trigger Does Not Vitiate Suo Motu Power

1. Case Snapshot

• Case Name: DNA Forensics Test Solutions Private Limited vs Union of India and Ors

• High Court: High Court of Delhi

• Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anish Dayal

• Date of Decision: July 24, 2026

• Area of Law: Company Law – Companies Act, 2013; Section 16 – Rectification of Company Name

2. Judgment in Brief

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging an order directing a company to change its name under Section 16(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner argued that Section 16(1)(a) could only be exercised suo motu by the Central Government, not on an application by a registered trademark proprietor. The Court rejected this, holding that even if triggered by an application, the Central Government can form its own opinion and act under Section 16(1)(a). Section 16(1)(b) provides a separate remedy for trademark proprietors, but that does not preclude the government from acting under Section 16(1)(a) based on information received. The Court found the names "DNA Forensics Test Solutions" and "DNA Forensics Laboratory" were too similar, especially as both companies operated in the same field of DNA testing.

3. Relevant Facts

• The petitioner company was registered as "DNA Forensics Test Solutions Private Limited."

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.