“CRC” Name Reservation under Companies Act using “RUN” problems faced by Professionals

Dear Friends,


We are filing representation before the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on behalf of professional suffering from  Rejection of Name by CRC.

I am Fellow member of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India  and in Practice since 2010 . I myself had loss some big assignments and lost money due to rejections by the CRC .

We believe that the officer sittings in CRC are not corrupt, but  there is some corruption due to which people are earning Rs 30,000/- to 50,000/- for name approval which in normal case would have been rejected by the CRC.

We are going to file a representation to the PMO office to the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Corporate Affairs informing them the issues we professionals  and entrepreneurs are facing to “Start Business”

We are requesting you to kindly share why your Company name or Company Incorporation was rejected so that we can compile it and file it with our representation.

Sharing some of Rejection stories:


Sr. No Name E Mail Reason for Rejection Reason for Rejection
1 Deepak Singhal sdeepak.cs@gmail.com The biggest Reason is NAME IS TOO GENERAL And for TM atleast they should mention under which class it is registered,  as earlier ROC gives clear remarks that this word is registered under this class
2 K. Sankara Subramanian <shankartheacs5@gmail.com> In our case, the promoter is holding a valid TM under class 14 and applied for incorporation with that TM Name. But the Form was marked for resubmission stating the name resembles with a TM under class 35. I think they are not even looking into the attachments or explanation letters.
3 sweety kapoor <sweetykapoor53@rediffmail.com> so but  my colleague  did not get the  first name approved through  run and rs.1000/- gone later second name which had  a simliar name got approved strange
4 Sourabh Singhal <cs.sourabh89@gmail.com> Most common Reason

Name is Too General

5 Durga Bansal <bansal.durga14@gmail.com> In my case, they rejected application 2 times for want of more documents and when third time we submitted the application with all the desired documents then they rejected saying the name is resembling with an existing company but the name given was totally different.
6 Manoj Jain <jain.csmanoj@gmail.com> my concern is why ROC cancel the SRN of INC for the change of name and ask for re-application through RUN and again rejected the application on the same grounds which was accepted earlier at the time of filing INC-1. they should migrate all the approves SRN applied through INC-1.what about the Companies who got the approval from Stock Exchanges and shareholders on the basis of earlier approval In that case it seen name was approved through INC-1 but  rejected in RUN
7 Harshit Shah <cs.harshitshah@yahoo.com> Name applied: _____ Capital Advisors Private Limited (Purely advisory activity does not need SEBI approval)

In-principle approval of concerned regulator is not provided as proposed name includes the word such as Insurance, Bank, Stock Exchange, Venture Capital, Asset Management, Nidhi, or Mutual Fund.
Proposed name   indicated   finance/credit/NBFC etc   activity but declaration according to rule 8(2)(b)(XIII) read with rule 8(2)(b)(III) of Companies Incorporation rules 2014 is not attached.

Name is resembling /closely resembling Companies/LLP

8 Manisha Menon <advmanisha28@gmail.com> Dear All,

I have till now tried four times to get one simple name for our Company. Everytime I am getting complaint that the name has been trademarked or the name remotely resembles to some other Company’s name. Again we have put for name approval. We are facing more difficulty because “RUN” does not have resubmission option. It only gets rejected and our Client’s loose money just like that. Its a very bad idea that MCA has brought. Its a loss of money for the clients. We do not mind paying stamp duty but name approval form should have resubmission option.

ACS 33083

9 Gyaneshwar Sahai <gyaneshwar.sahai@gmail.com> Name is resembling /closely resembling Companies/LLP
10 Aarti Bhasin <aartibhasin0203@gmail.com> I faced the reason that the name is too generic (which was not the case as the same was available when I checked under “name availability” on MCA services). I find it totally unjustifiable.
11 Taruna Kalra <taruna.cs@gmail.com> 1. they are not checking attachments properly. in hurry, they sent form in re-submission, without checking that attachments are already there
12 Mittal Shah <consultmittal@gmail.com> We have filed name approval application under RUN on MCA portal SRN G75638643 on 3 February 2018 for “LIFESTYLE CLUB AND LESIURE PRIVATE LIMITED” which is rejected by CRC on 6 February 2018 on the basis that  vide – Name is resembling /closely resembling Companies/LLP. The rejection letter stated that Proposed name is closely resemble with existing/reserved Company(s)/LLP(s) ‘LIFESTYLE CLUBOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED’ , ‘LIFESTYLE LEISURES PRIVATE LIMITED’ and many others. Hence, it is not considerable as per the provisions of Sec 4(2) of Cos Act-2013 r.w. ,Companies (INC) Rules, 2014.

Therefore, we again filed another application for name on 6 February 2018 itself as the client eagerly wants to form a company vide SRN G75901363 after checking availability of the desired name on the portal. Accordingly we applied for a modified new name “RC LIFESTYLE CLUB AND LEISURE PRIVATE LIMITED” which was also rejected again after waiting for two days on the similar grounds. Proposed name is nearly resembling with the names of the existing/reserved company/LLP ” RC LEISURE PRIVATE LIMITED”. Hence, not considerable as per the provisions of section 4(2) of the Companies Act -2013.   Proposed name with  “RC” is a TM under Class 36,  Hence not considerable in view of provisions of rule 8(2) (a) (ii) of Companies (Inc.) Rules, 2014.    hence the form is rejected.

We have also raised ticket for service complaint on MCA portal asking for possible solution as the client is in urgency to form a company and start a deal, the government on the public communication as well as on MCA portal saying that now incorporation of a company is “zero fee”, and “starting a business much easier” but we did not find any solution from the compliant that we raised also, two names were rejected causing delay of almost 5 days and still we are back in the same position. Government should either provide some window to check name from all angles by the customer only else provide few name options while applying so alternative names can be approved at least and business can be started without LOSING TIME AND MONEY. MCA tickets only give caveated answers, there is no solution provided.

We need alternative solution on name approval as we do not see any similarity in this class of proposed business. If both these names are not available we wish to continue with “LIFESTYLE LIVING CONCEPTS PRIVATE LIMITED” , we have LLP reserved with the same name.

this is a draft email summarizing our complaints with CRC.

13 DEEPAK SADHU <csdeepakmails@gmail.com> Hi All

It has become a scary assignment to take up incorporation…..I will not be sure if approval of the name will be sought or not….

Please help….I am ready for volunteering to the Ministry and ICS

14 Alpi Nehra alpinehracs@gmail.com Name is resembling /closely resembling Companies/LLP.
15 Akshat Garg cs.akshatgarg@gmail.com> Name Applied : AYUSHI PROGOLD PRIVATE LIMITED                                            Reason for Rejection Present name of the company includes/indicates “Finance/Investment/Stock Broking etc”  which is allowed , subject to in principal approval from the concerned regulatory authority is furnished, for the proposed name change.
16 Pratik Dhodia <cspratik.d@gmail.com> We also filed Name Application through RUN, Got rejected twice, Reason being “approval of Regulatory Body Required” Though the Main Object of the Proposed Company was Carrying on Financial Advisory & Consultancy Business.
17 Anu Pasrija <anupasrija@gmail.com> Hi

I am not understanding the basic idea of bringing this RUN feature into picture . It is not doing any ease of business .So much exercise needs to be done while applying for the name which is actually very time consuming  Over that CRC is taking almost 2-3 days for approval  rather rejection I must say which is making us speechless before the Clients . We cannot quote exact fees to the client  because we  dont know how many attempts it would take for name approval .

Incorporation has really become a tough assignment to take up

18 CS Praveen Pandey cspraveenpandey@gmail.com Proposed Name – AIMS MAX GARDENIA HOMES PRIVATE LIMITEDProposed names  with  prefix “AIMS” is  a  TM under Class  36 or many more   Rule 8(2) (a) (ii) of Companies (Inc.) Rules, 2014 Hence, not considerable as per the provisions of section 4(2) of the Companies Act -2013. – in Our application name is  AIMS MAX GARDENIA
19 FCS Mahesh Grandhi <mahesh.gpa@gmail.com> We filed for the proposed name with the prefix which includes capital word and like i.e., capitalman and its going to be take up only infrastructure objects and we filed three times and they are asking to submit declaration of Nbfc/Rbi /Sebi which is under rule 8 of INC rules. But Promoters are not convincing to give declaration as required by mca as their proposed company is not a capital trading company

there shall be some stringent rule for capital trading companies …. mere having prefix of the word capitalman, how can anyone give declaration .

20 Harshit Shah <cs.harshitshah@yahoo.com> Name applied was: BHT Commodities Private Limited.

Reason for rejection:
Proposed name is nearly resembling to the existing/reserved  company’s name/LLP’s name BRIO FORCE FITNESS PRIVATE LIMITED and many others. Hence, proposed name is not considerable as per the provisions of section 4(2)of Companies Act, 2013. Proposed name includes word” BHT  ” is existing trademark under Application Number:  1547712 Class / Classes:  35  and many others. <<The trademark is expired>> Thus, proposed name is not considerable as per Rule 8(2)(a)(ii)of Companies(Incorporation)rule, 2014.The proposed name with word COMMODITIES and objects  are too wide & diverse accordingly, indicates that the company carry on finance/investment related activities but declaration according to rule 8(2)(b)(XIII)&(iii) of Companies Incorporation rules 2014 is not attached.Hence, rejected.

21 Mayank Arora cs@mayankarora.co.in The Biggest reason we are getting is of TRADEMARK, in case name doesnt fall in the same class than also they raise objection.

In one case MNC wanted to Form a IT Company in India with the same name but CRC did not allow and raised an Objection that Name is too general, PFA Rejection letter

22 Sandip Jejani Dear Concern

1. One of my client is having four Companies starting with the name “Sahyog”

a. Sahyog Kuries Pvt. Ltd.
b. Sahyog Megachits Pvt. Ltd.
c. Sahyog Realcon Ltd.
d. Sahyog Township Pvt. Ltd.

These Companies are almost 20 years old (Directors and Shareholders common in all) but while applying for the name of new Company the form has got rejected on the ground that it is a trade mark of some other Companies.

The name required is:

a. Sahyog Finance Pvt. Ltd.
b. Sahyog Loans Pvt. Ltd.

2. Second Client is having two Companies starting with the name “Anisha” (15 to 20 years old with common Directors and Shareholders)

a. Anisha Interno Pvt. Ltd.
b. Anisha Appliances Pvt. Ltd.

The name required is:

a. Anisha Industries Pvt. Ltd.
b. Anisha Foods Pvt. Ltd.

Please look into the matter and suggest.

23 More Legal Services <onuscg@gmail.com> Name includes a registered trademark/application to trademark registration
24 Sanajy Dholkia sanjayrd65@gmail.com The name was made available under old INC 1 and while Filing Form 24 with ROC
they are asking for RUN SRN Applied under RUN on 6th Feb No answer and still showing

Plz share your story

Thanking you

Kashif Ali

FCS, LL.B, M.Com

Kashif Ali & Associates

(Company Secretaries)

C-100, New Friends Colony, Sarai Juelna, Opp Escort Heart Institute, New Delhi-25
Ph:  9718483209, mail: cs.kashifali@gmail.com




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: