2022 (1) TMI 1341 - HC - Companies Law

Seeking a direction to be issued to the Respondent No. 1 to provide information in terms of his Right to Information Act, 2005 - whether the search conducted by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) prior to registering the said company, reflected the World Book Company Private Limited name or not? - HELD THAT - The search report in this case has been provided by the First Appellate Authority as an annexure, showing the three companies i.e. World Book India Private Limited , World Book Company Private Limited and World Hotel Booking Centre India Private Limited - Admittedly, the entity by the name World Book Company Private Limited was incorporated on 23rd May, 2012 and, thereafter, World Book India Private Limited was incorporated on 24th August, 2012. Thus, when the application for the World Book India Private Limited was processed by the MCA, the name of the earlier registered company ought to have come up in the search report. The Petitioner is already stated to have filed WORLD BOOK INC ORS VERSUS WORLD BOOK COMPANY (P) LTD. 2014 (10) TMI 1065 - DELHI HIGH COURT seeking reliefs under the Trademark Act, 1999 and Passing off. The said suit is stated to be at the stage of trial before the Original Side of this Court. Accordingly, it is directed that the above details of incorporation of the companies shall be noted in the said suit. Secondly, if any further information is needed from the MCA, the Petitioner may summon the records or a witness from the MCA in the said suit - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to impugned order by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) MCA.
2. Direction sought for information under Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) application.
3. Discrepancy in search report for incorporation of 'World Book India Private Limited'.
4. Incorrect information provided by CPIO-MCA in response to RTI application.
5. Appeal before First Appellate Authority and subsequent order.
6. Second Appeal before Central Information Commission (CIC) and its decision.
7. Allegation of incorrect search report by Petitioner.
8. Importance of conducting a thorough search before company registration.
9. Details of companies involved in the search report.
10. Timing of incorporation of 'World Book Company Private Limited' and 'World Book India Private Limited'.
11. Petitioner's ongoing legal proceedings under Trademark Act, 1999 and Passing off.
12. Directions given by the High Court regarding incorporation details and further information from MCA.

Analysis:
The case involves a challenge to an order by the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) MCA regarding the provision of information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) application. The primary issue revolves around the discrepancy in the search report for the incorporation of 'World Book India Private Limited' despite the existence of 'World Book Company Private Limited'. The Petitioner alleged that incorrect information was provided by the CPIO-MCA in response to the RTI application, leading to subsequent appeals before the First Appellate Authority and the Central Information Commission (CIC).

The CIC, in its decision, noted that the required information had been provided to the appellant and deemed no further intervention necessary. However, the Petitioner contended that the search report provided was inaccurate, as 'World Book Company Private Limited' should have appeared first due to its prior incorporation. The High Court highlighted the importance of conducting thorough searches before company registration to prevent disputes arising from similar or identical company names.

The High Court detailed the timeline of incorporation for 'World Book Company Private Limited' and 'World Book India Private Limited', emphasizing the relevance of incorporation dates in search reports. It directed that details of company incorporations be noted in the ongoing legal proceedings under the Trademark Act, 1999 and Passing off initiated by the Petitioner. Additionally, the High Court instructed that if further information was required from the MCA, the Petitioner could summon records or a witness in the ongoing legal suit.

In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the petition, emphasizing that no further orders were necessary and parties should proceed with their contentions in the pending legal suit. The judgment provided clarity on the search report discrepancy, highlighted the importance of accurate searches before company registration, and outlined the next steps for the Petitioner in their legal proceedings.