The Registrar of Companies, Mumbai, imposed a penalty under Section 159 of the Companies Act, 2013 for violation of Section 155 relating to possession of duplicate Director Identification Numbers (DINs). The applicant had originally obtained DIN 06799908 in 2014 and later, during filing of the FiLLiP Form for incorporation of an LLP on 12.12.2022, a second DIN 10033128 was automatically generated due to a system error during portal migration. The applicant stated that the duplicate DIN was not intentionally obtained and was discovered only while reviewing master data. A DIR-5 application for surrender of the duplicate DIN was reportedly filed, though a copy was unavailable. The adjudicating officer observed that the default was not intentional and did not prejudice members, creditors, or the public. Considering the mitigating circumstances and the suo motu disclosure, the authority imposed a reduced penalty of Rs. 49,060 for continuing possession of duplicate DINs for 1,261 days.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS
ROC Mumbai I
100, Everest, Marine Drive, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, 400002 Phone: 022-22812627
E-mail: roc.mumbai@mca.gov.in
Order ID: PO/ADJ/05-2026/MH/02124 | Dated: 25/05/2026
ORDER FOR ADJUDICATION OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 454 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 (‘THE ACT’) FOR VIOLATION OF SECTION 159 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013.
A. Appointment of Adjudicating Officer:
Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide itsGazette notification number S.O. 698(E) dated 10/02/2026 appointed undersigned as Adjudicating Officer in exercise of the powers conferred by section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013 [herein after known as Act] read with Companies (Adjudication of Penalties) Rules, 2014 for adjudging penalties under the provisions of this Act.
B. Individual details:
In the matter relating to KRISHNA AJIT MEHTA ________
C. Provisions of the Act:
If any individual or director of a company makes any default in complying with any of the provisions of section 152, section 155 and section 156, such individual or director of the company shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to fifty thousand rupees and where the default is a continuing one, with a further penalty which may extend to five hundred rupees for each day after the first during which such default continues.
D. Facts about the case:
1. Default committed by the officers in default/noticee – Whereas, the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the ROC) is in receipt of a suo-motu Adjudication Application dated 02.09.2025 submitted by Mrs. Krishna Ajit Mehta, (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant) under Section 454 read with Section 159 of the Companies Act, 2013 for default under Section 155 of the Act on account of obtaining duplicate Director Identification Number (DIN).
Whereas Section 155 of the Act reads as follows:
No individual, who has already been allotted a Director Identification Number under section 154, shall apply for, obtain or possess another Director Identification Number.
Whereas the Applicant has stated that she applied for and was allotted the first DIN:06799908 on 28.11.2014. She used this DIN for all directorial compliances with respect to Mehta International Private Limited. Further, she continued as a Director in the said Company till 26.01.2017.
Whereas she has submitted that while filing the FiLLiP Form for incorporation of KY Buildcon LLP on 12.12.2022, a duplicate DIN: 10033128 was automatically generated by the system and allotted to her. She had never applied for the second DIN and its generation was solely attributable to system error during portal migration process and was beyond her control. Further, she discovered the same only while reviewing her Master data. Ergo, the Applicant was in possession of two DINs simultaneously in contravention of the provisions of Section 155 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Whereas the Applicant has submitted that she filed DIR-5 for surrender of the said second DIN. However, a copy of the same is not available. The Applicant is directed to submit the same.
2. No reply received from the noticee on E-adjudication portal. The Adjudicating officer is of the view that no E-hearing is required in the instant case.
E.Order:
1. A Show Cause notice bearing ID: SCN/ADJ/09-2025/MB/02585 dated 02.12.2025 was issued to the Noticee on the E-adjudication portal under Section 454 read with Section 159 for default under Section 155 of the Act.
B.No reply received from the noticee on E-adjudication portal.
C.The Adjudicating officer is of the view that no E-hearing is required in the instant case.
D.Rule 3(12) of the Companies (Adjudication of Penalties) Rules, 2014 provides that while adjudging quantum of penalty, the adjudicating officer shall have due regard to the following factors, namely:- (a) size of the company; (b) nature of business carried on by the company; (c) injury to public interest; (d) nature of the default; (e) repetition of the default; (f) the amount of disproportionate gain or unfair advantage, wherever quantifiable, made as a result of the default; and (g) the amount of loss caused to an investor or group of investors or creditors as a result of the default:
E. On perusal of the suo motu adjudication application and submission made thereunder, it is observed that the default was not intentional and not of such nature as will prejudice the interests of the members or creditors or others dealing with the Company.
F. Thus, I am of the view that given the bonafide action on part of the Applicant in submitting the suo-moto adjudication application and the above-mentioned mitigating circumstances, the quantum of penalty shall be Rs. 10,000/- for first default and further penalty of Rs.31/- for each day after the first during which such default continued.
G. Thus, the period of default is considered from 12.12.2022 that is the date of obtaining second DIN till 25.05.2026 that is the date of this order which amounts to 1261 days. The Applicant shall be liable to a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for first default and Rs. 31/- per day for further 1260 days that is Rs. 39,060- (Rupees Thirty-Nine
Thousands Sixty only) aggregating to Rs.49,060/- (Rupees Forty Nine Thousands Sixty only).
H.Now, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Adjudicating Officer vide Notification dated 24th March 2015, having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, show-cause notice sent and reply received thereto, I hereby impose a penalty of Rs. 49,060/- (Rupees Forty Nine Thousands Sixty only) under the penal provisions of Section 159 for default under Section 155 on the Applicant Director that is Mr. KRISHNA AJIT MEHTA.
2. The details of penalty imposed on the company, officers in default and others are shown in the table below:
| (A) | Name of person | Rectification of | Penalty Amount | Additional Penalty | Maximum limit for |
| on whom penalty imposed (B) | Default required
(C) |
(D) | (E) (*Per day of continuing default i.e. date of rectification of default less order issue date) | Penalty (F) | |
| 1 | KRISHNA AJIT | NA | 49060 | 0 | 50000 |
| MEHTA having | |||||
| DIN as 06799908 |
3. The notified officers in default/noticee shall rectify the default mentioned above and pay the penalty, so applicable within 90 days of receipt of the order.
4. The notified officers in default/noticee shall pay the penalty amount via ‘e-Adjudication’ facility which can be accessed through the respective login IDs on the website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs and upload the copy of paid challan / SRN of e-filing (if applicable) on the ‘e-Adjudication’ portal itself. It is also directed that the penalty so imposed upon the officers in default shall be paid from their personal sources/income.
5. Appeal against this order may be filed in writing with the Regional Director, RD Mumbai within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of this order, in Form ADJ setting for the grounds of appeal and shall be accompanied by a certified copy of this order [Section 454 (5) & 454 (6) of the Act, read with Companies (Adjudication of Penalties) Rules, 2014].
6. For penal consequences of non-payment of penalty within the prescribed time limit, please refer Section 454(8) of the Companies Act, 2013.
Chandan Kumar,
Registrar of Companies
ROC Mumbai I
