Form 1A: Name Availabilty

No, It is not compulsorily.

The Companies Act, 1956 or Emblems & Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 does not mention anywhere that the Name should be related to the Main objects.

Moreover, Every law must be based on the Logic. And there is no logic behind the Relation of Main objects clause.

So, It is Invalid.

I am still editing this post. Please back after few minutes.

I am starting new post as 24 Hours has elapsed, so, I can not edit my above post.

Though, E-forms are regulated by the Companies Forms & Addendum Rules.  It doesn't have the overridding effect on the Companies Act, 1956.

MCA's name selection & MOA object connection logic is also wrong.

Because, It is not pssible that everytime we find a word related to our business activity like

ABC Consulatancy Limited

ABC Infrastructure Limited

ABC Finance & Investment Limited.

In practical life, sometime company covers very wide range of area & Single/Double word is not sufficient enough to describe the type of Company's Operation.

Then we simply have to write ABC Limited.

e.g. Company which does the following business

(1) HR Placement

(2) Finance & Investment

(3) BPO Processing

(4) Consultancy

There is no name which covers these type of activity.

So, It is not compulsory that name should give the rough idea about the Company's Main Object.

The only thing that matters is that, whether the Name applied is prohibited under the Names & Emblems (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 or not.

Ankur Shah (Practicing Company Secretary)

“Guru Gautam” Bungalow, Inside Parshwa Tower,

Nr. Shyamal Cross Road, 132ft. Ring Road,

Satellite, Ahmedabad – 15

Contact: + 91-9427633901

E-mail: ankurjewel @ gmail.com

Blog: csankur.blogspot.com

 Dear friend, does the roc agrre with ur point of view?