[1] The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 18th December, 2002 passed by the Regional Director (Western Region), Mumbai, rejecting the petitioner's application seeking direction under Section 22 of the Companies Act, 1956 for change of name of another Company i.e. M/s.Pino Bisazza Glass Private Limited as the name of the respondent No.1 Company was considered to be nearly resembling with the name of the petitioner Company.

[2] This Court has issued notice dated 21st April, 2003. Thereafter, on 28th April, 2004, the petition was admitted by this Court and rule was issued. Affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the respondent No.2 on 18th August, 2004 and affidavit-in-reply is filed by the respondent No.1 Company on 23rd December, 2005. The petitioner has filed the rejoinder to both the affidavits-in-reply on 13th February, 2006. Since the petition is ripe for final hearing, the same is taken up for hearing and the learned advocates appearing on behalf of all the parties were heard at great length on the dispute between the parties.

[3] The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner Company is incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and commenced its business of manufacturing and selling glass mosaic tiles, glass tiles, marble tiles and building materials. The petitioner has a technical collaboration with Bisazza SPA, Italy by virtue of which the petitioner was allowed to use the name of Bisazza for the goods to be manufacturing by the petitioner. The said Bisazza SPA, Italy is one of the world leaders in these goods. The petitioner applied for registration of trade mark Bisazza in February, 1996 before the Registrar of Trade Marks and the said application is still pending.

[3.1] The petitioner in April, 2000 came to know that the respondent No.1 Company was registered under the Companies Act, 1956 by name Pino Bisazza Glass Private Limited vide Registration Certificate dated 8th March, 2000. The respondent No.1 Company was set up with the same object of manufacturing and selling similar products to that of the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, applied to the respondent No.2 i.e. The Regional Director, Western Region, Mumbai for cancellation of the registration of respondent No.1, in May, 2000 under Sections 20 and 22 of the Companies Act, 1956. Since the said application was not being heard, the petitioner filed Special Civil Application No.9106 of 2000 before this Court. The said petition was disposed of by this Court on 28th August, 2000 giving direction to the respondent No.2 that the application of the petitioner should be heard as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The then Regional Director, Western Region passed an order on 26th September, 2000 directing the respondent No.1 Company to change its name within a period of three months from the date of the order under Section 22(1) of the Companies Act r/w. Notification No.GSR-288(E) dated 31st May, 1991, of the Government of India.

[3.2] Being aggrieved by the said order of the then Regional Director, Western Region, the respondent No.1 filed Special Civil Application No.13009 of 2000 before this Court which was allowed by this court vide its order dated 1st April, 2002 only on the ground that the same did not record reasons for passing final order with further clarification that it would be open to the respondent No.1 to move the respondent No.2 for reconsidering the matter afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Pursuant to this direction, the respondent No.2 passed an order on 18th December, 2002 rejecting the petitioner's application for cancellation of the name of the respondent No.1 Company as Pino Bisazza Glass Private Limited.

[4] It is this order which is under challenge in the present petition.

[5] Mr.S. N. Soparkar, learned senior advocate appe