Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC Ban on Kirloskar Trademark Licensing
The Supreme Court, on October 17, stayed a Bombay High Court order that had stopped Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) from licensing the ‘Kirloskar’ trademark to other group companies involved in overlapping businesses with Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL).
A Division Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the interim order, observing that the Bombay High Court should not have widened the earlier restrictions while the main appeal was still pending.
The judges remarked, “We are of the prima facie view that the order dated 10th October 2025, which expands the scope of the restraint imposed earlier vide order dated 25th July 2025, ought not to have been passed when the appeal is pending for consideration and full facts in respect of any earlier licensing of such Kirloskar mark within the group companies have not been discussed.”
The case revolves around the ownership and control of the ‘Kirloskar’ trademark. KPL, established in 1965, manages the trademark on behalf of all Kirloskar Group companies. In 2018, it asked all group entities, including KBL, to sign fresh user agreements. KBL refused, claiming that the assignment lacked valid consideration and that trademark rights should revert to them.
A civil suit was then filed by KBL before the Pune Trial Court, which in January 2025 restrained KPL from licensing or assigning the trademark to any entity, including group companies.
When KPL appealed, the Bombay High Court on July 25, 2025, partially relaxed the ban—allowing KPL to license the mark within the group, but not for overlapping business areas. However, a subsequent order dated October 10, 2025, issued by a different Bench, modified the earlier ruling by adding “licensing” to the restraint—effectively re-imposing the earlier ban.
KPL challenged this modification before the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court’s second order unfairly broadened the scope of restrictions without reviewing new facts. The apex court found merit in the argument, stayed the operation of the October 10 order, and issued notice to the respondents.
Case Title: Kirloskar Proprietary Limited v. Kirloskar Brothers Limited
Case Number: Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 29662–29663/2025
