Everest Beverages And Food Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6768/2026& CM APPL. 33271/2026 CM APPL. 33272/2026 CM APPL. 33619/2026 EVEREST BEVERAGES AND FOOD INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.

Shravan Kumar Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Ms. Sakshi Agarwal, Ms. Smriti Nair, Mr. Saksham Dhingra & Mr. Darpan Sachdeva, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Mr. Hersh Desai, Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Mr.Mehendra Pratap, Mr. Anand Mishra, Advs. for R-2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 18.05.2026 1.

This appeal has been filed challenging impugned order dated 09th March 2025 passed by the respondent no.1/Union of India through Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, allowing the application of respondent no. 2/Company [Everest Food Products Private Limited] under Section 16 of the Companies Act, 2013 ["Companies Act"] and directing change of name by petitioner/Company [Everest Beverages and Food Industries Pvt. Ltd.] to change its corporate name within a period of 3 months. 2.

Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner, points out that notwithstanding the respective rights and contentions asserted by the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

parties before the Regional Director, no cogent reasoning has been provided by the Regional Director in this regard.

3.

A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the various paragraphs merely record submissions of the parties and the summarization of the facts of the case by the Presenting Officer, Shri Prahlad Meena, Joint Director. After recording this as a narrative, the Regional Director, in paragraph 10, simply passes an order directing rectification of the name of the petitioner/Company. There is not a shred of any reasoning, justification or analysis in the order by the Regional Director, which cannot be countenanced, considering that the remedy under Section 16 of the Companies Act is a drastic one, whereby the corporate name is required to be rectified, thereby impacting the corporate organization.

4.

The petition is, therefore, allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Regional Director for passing a fresh order, taking into account the respective rights and contentions of the parties, along with reasons for the same, while also providing one further hearing to the parties. 5.

The matter may be heard by the Regional Director on 6th July 2026, subject to any further directions by the Regional Director. The Regional Director shall dispose of the matter on or before 15th September 20266, considering that the matter has already been examined earlier. 6.

It is clarified that this Court has not made any observation on the merits of the matter.

7.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the matter be remanded back to the Regional Director for re-hearing. 8.

Meanwhile, the impugned order dated 09th March 2025 passed by the Regional Director is set aside; Regional Director shall pass a fresh order after hearing the parties.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

Pending applications are rendered infructuous. 10.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MAY 18, 2026/sm/tk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.