M/S CONTINENTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
WRIC/31560/2025 · 2025-09-16
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 94168 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 94168 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31560 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. Petitioner before this Court is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act. Initially, the company was registered in the name of M/s Modi Tyres Company Limited which was subsequently changed to M/s Continental India Private Limited and a certificate of registration was granted by the Registrar of the Companies, Kanpur. An application has been moved before the revenue authorities for changing the name of the company from M/s Modi Tyres Company Limited to M/s Continental India Private Limited. The application has been rejected, against which, an appeal was preferred which was dismissed. Thereafter, a revision was preferred which has also been dismissed. 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that only the name of the company needs to be changed in the revenue records as the Registrar of Companies has already accorded the necessary permission and a certificate has been granted in favour of the petitioner. According to him, once the Registrar of Companies has granted the permission for changing the name of the company, there is no occasion to reject the application for mutating the name of the company which has been changed. 3. Learned Standing Counsel has defended the order passed by the revenue authorities and submits that till the necessary permission is obtained by the State Government, the authorities could not have recorded the name of the petitioner in the revenue record. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Durgesh Kumar Singh, Sharad Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Continental India Private Limited .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
4. I have heard the respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 5. It is very strange to note that once the Registrar of Companies had allowed the change of name of the company which was registered under the provisions of the Companies Act and a certificate has been issued for changing the name, there stood no occasion for the revenue authorities to reject the application for incorporating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records.
The Registrar of Companies is an instrumentality of the State as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the order passed by him changing the name of the company needs to have been incorporated in the revenue records. The order impugned dated 14.07.2025, 26.02.2024 and 03.01.2023 are hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Tehsildar (Judicial), Sardhana, Meerut to carry out the necessary changes in the revenue records recording the name of the company as per the order of the Registrar of Companies and the certificate issued by him. The necessary exercise shall be carried out by the respondent no. 6 within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 6. The writ petition stands allowed. September 17, 2025 A. V. Singh WRIC No. 31560 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad