1. The order at Annexure-A, dated 24.11.011, by which the petitioner herein is directed under Section 22(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) to change its name within a period of three months from the date of the impugned order, is called in question in this writ petition.

2. The third respondent-company, i.e., Surya Elevators Private Limited was incorporated on 6.10.2005 with an authorised share capital of Rs.5,00,000/-which was divided equally between Mr. C.S. Surendranadha Reddy and Mr. K. Arunachalam (who is presently the Managing Director of respondent No.3) in the ratio of 2500 shares each. Respondent No.3 is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of passenger and freight elevators.

3. Petitioner is a private limited company incorporated on 29.11.2010 in the name and style “Surya Elevators & Escalators India Private Limited”. Mr. Venugopal Reddy and Mrs. Meena Pothireddy are the Directors of the petitioner-company. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of elevators and escalators.

4. Respondent No.3 initiated proceedings under Section 22(1)(i) of the Act against the petitioner before the second respondent for a direction to change the name of the petitioner, by filing the application on 13.11.2011, on the ground that the petitioner-company’s name is registered through inadvertence. The petitioner herein filed objections to such application before the second respondent.

5. In the meanwhile, respondent No.3 instituted the suit in O.S.No.5275/2011 for injunction alleging ‘passing off’. In the said suit, relief of permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from using the trade/brand name “Surya” is prayed for on the ground that respondent No.3 is the sole owner of the said trade/brand name “Surya”. Application for temporary injunction was filed by respondent No.3 in the said suit which came to be rejected on 29.9.2011 on the ground that customers of goods of lifts and escalators are not ordinary customers; they cannot be compared with the customers who purchase tobacco or tobacco products at the counters; the elevators are purchased and used by rich people, developers and contractors, etc. The matter in question is considered by the second respondent, after dismissal of the application for temporary injunction by the Civil Court.

6. It is the case of the petitioner (i.e., opponent before the second respondent) that one of the former Directors of respondent No.3, namely Mr. C. Surendranadha Reddy had got registered a proprietorship concern in the year 2004 under the name and style of “M/s. Surya Elevator Services” at Hyderabad. According to the petitioner, it was Mr. C. Surendranadha Reddy who coined the name “Surya” for his business in the year 2004; in order to expand his business concern, he shifted to Bangalore and incorporated respondent No.3-company by joining the hands with his college friend Mr. K. Arunachalam, the Managing Director of respondent No.3 herein; at that point of time, Mr. K. Arunachalam was engaged in the business of reconditioning and resale of photocopying machines under the name and style of “Canon Copier Services”, at Bangalore. Subsequently, the authorised share capital of respondent No.3 was raised to Rs.40,00,000/-and the paid-up capital was increased to Rs.32,50,000/-in the month of December, 2010. Mrs. Rajani Challachemala Subramanyam, who is wife of Mr. K. Arunachalam was also appointed as an Additional Director of respondent No.3 with issue of shares in respondent No.3 and consequently the share held by Mr. C. Surendranadha Reddy in respondent No.3-company was reduced to 7.69%; the third respondent herein issued ‘No Objection Certificate’ on 8.12.2010 to Mr. Venugopal Reddy for registration of the petitioner in the name and style “Surya Elevators & Escalators India Private Limited” and accordingly the petitioner-company was registered. Hence, the registration of petitioner-company was not as a