The Registrar of Companies, Bangalore, acting as Adjudicating Officer under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013, passed an order dated 09.02.2026 imposing penalty for violation of Section 155 of the Act. The director had originally obtained a DIN in 2016 but later inadvertently acquired a second DIN during the incorporation of an LLP on 09.11.2021. Realising the mistake, he filed Form DIR-5 on 20.03.2025 to surrender the second DIN. However, since holding more than one DIN contravenes Section 155, adjudication proceedings were initiated. The violation continued for 1227 days, from 09.11.2021 to 20.03.2025, attracting penalty under Section 159. After issuing show cause notice and granting hearing, the Adjudicating Officer concluded that the default was established. Considering that the violation was non-repetitive and caused no public injury, 25% of the maximum penalty was imposed, amounting to ₹1,65,750. The penalty is to be paid within 90 days, with appeal available before the Regional Director.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS
ROC Bangalore
Registrar Of Companies, ‘E’ Wing, 2nd Floor, Kendriya Sadana, Kormangala, Bangalore, Karnataka, India, 560034
Phone: 080-25633105,080-25537449
E-mail: roc.bangalore@mca.gov.in
Order ID: PO/ADJ/02-2026/BL/01610 | Dated: 09/02/2026
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 its Gazette notification number S.O. 831(E) dated 24/03/2015 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 BHARATH REDDY………..
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 – Mr. Bharath Reddy, Director (DIN: 07538033) has filed a suo-motu adjudication application on 02.06.2025 for violation of section 155 of the Act read with Rule 11 of Companies (Appointment of Directors) Rules, 2014. It is seen from the application that Mr. Bharath Reddy obtained his first DIN (Director Identification Number) (No. 07538033) on 07.06.2016. He had obtained his first DIN and was never appointed as a director in any company.
Thereafter, the applicant became a designated partner in Nara Bros Properties LLP which was incorporated on 09.11.2021 under the jurisdiction of this office. During the process of incorporation, Mr. Bharath Reddy, applied for what eventually was his second DIN and the same was allotted vide DIN 09391431 on 09.11.2021. However, the applicant realized that the acquisition of his second DIN 09391431 was inadvertent and without any malafide intention.
Mr. Bharath Reddy, upon realisation of the mistake and violation committed, applied for DIR-5 on 20.03.2025 for rectification of the violation and for surrendering the second DIN i.e. DIN 09391431 obtained by him.
The form was sent for resubmission citing violation of section 155 of the Act, and further requiring to get the violation adjudicated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 to consider the application. Subsequently, this adjudication application has been made by him. Hence, Mr. Sanjay N B has violated the provisions of section 155 of the Act for a duration of 1227 days i.e. from 09.11.2021 to 20.03.2025.
2. The company and officers in default asked for a hearing and same was provided. The order is issued based on the application, notice for adjudication, replies received and submission made at the time of hearing.
E. Order:
1. Bharath Reddy, director having DIN: 07538033 has filed a suo-motu adjudication application for violation of section 155 of the Act read with Rule 11 of Companies (Appointment of Directors) Rules, 2014. It has been stated in the application that Mr. Bharath Reddy obtained his first DIN (Director Identification Number) No. 07538033 on 07.06.2016 but was never appointed as director in any company.
Thereafter, the applicant became a director in Nara Bros Properties LLP which was incorporated on 09.11.2021 under the jurisdiction of this office. During the process of incorporation, Mr. Bharath Reddy, applied for what eventually was his second DIN and the same was allotted vide DIN 09391431 on 09.11.2021. However, the applicant later realized that his inadvertent acquisition of second DIN 09391431 was in contravention of the Companies Act, 2013. Thereafter, upon realisation of the violation committed, he applied for rectification of the violation, and for surrendering the second DIN i.e., DIN 09391431 obtained by him by filing DIR-5 on 20.03.2025. Upon receiving resubmission remarks in respect of this DIR-5 to get the violation under section 155 of the Act adjudicated, this adjudication application has been filed by the applicant.
Pursuant to the adjudication application filed by the company, show cause notice dated 16.07.2025 was sent to the director through e-Adjudication module and through speed post. Subsequently, e-hearing notice dated 30.12.2025 was and the same was scheduled on 13.01.2026 which was attended by Mr. Thirupal Gorige, practising company secretory and authorized representative who reiterated the submissions as per the adjudication application filed.
It is established that there is a violation of section 155 of the Act for the duration of 09.11.2021 to 20.03.2025 i.e. 1227 days which is punishable under section 159 of the Act which provides for a maximum one-time penalty of fifty thousand rupees and further maximum penalty of five hundred rupees for each day after the first during which the default continues.
Therefore, having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the director through his authorised representative as detailed above, and in exercise of the powers vested under section 454(3)(a) of the Companies Act 2013, I do hereby impose 25% of the maximum penalty in the following manner on the director considering the nature of default, its non-repeating nature and no injury caused to public interest in accordance with provisions of section 446A of the Act.
2. The details of penalty imposed on the company, officers in default and others are shown in the table below:
| (A) | Name of person on whom penalty imposed (B) | Rectification of Default required (C) | Penalty Amount (D) | Additional Penalty
(E) (*Per day of continuing default i.e. date of rectification of default less order issue date) |
Maximum limit for Penalty (F) |
| 1 | BHARATH REDDY having DIN as 07538033 | 165750 | 0 | 663500 |
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 Hyderabad 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.
Manoj Bang,
Registrar of Companies
ROC Bangalore
