The Delhi High Court, in Refex Industries Limited v. Regional Director, Northern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr., set aside an order of the Regional Director dated August 23, 2018 rejecting the petitioner’s application filed under Section 16(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner, Refex Industries Limited, which was originally incorporated as Refex Refrigerants Private Limited in 2002 and subsequently renamed in 2013, holds a registered trademark “REFEX” in Class 1 in relation to refrigerant gases. The petition was filed challenging the corporate name “Refex Hotels Private Limited”, adopted by the second respondent in connection with hospitality services.

The Court observed that Section 16 of the Companies Act provides a mechanism for rectification of company names that are identical or too nearly resemble an existing registered trademark. In this context, the Court held that the Regional Director had erred in placing reliance on the dissimilarity of business activities between the parties. The Court noted that the statutory requirement under Section 16 focuses on the resemblance between the impugned corporate name and the registered trademark, and does not require an assessment of the similarity of the parties’ business operations.

Relying on earlier decisions including CGMP Pharmaplan Pvt. Ltd. and Everstone Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd., the Court reiterated that phonetic and visual similarity with a registered trademark is sufficient to attract the provisions of Section 16. Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order of the Regional Director and directed reconsideration of the petitioner’s application in accordance with law.

Source: Refex Industries Limited v. Regional Director, Northern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr. [W.P.(C)-IPD 27/2022].