Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on October 17 stayed a Bombay High Court order that had barred Kirloskar Proprietary Limited from licensing the 'Kirloskar' trademark to other group companies operating in businesses that overlap with Kirloskar Brothers Limited.

The interim order was passed by a Division Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan.

The court noted that the licensing ban was added through a modification order passed while the original appeal was still pending.

The bench observed, “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 Court was hearing Special Leave Petitions filed by Kirloskar Proprietary challenging two Bombay High Court orders. The first, dated July 25, 2025, had allowed limited licensing of the trademark. The second, passed on October 10, 2025, modified that order and imposed a stricter bar on licensing for overlapping businesses.

The dispute concerns ownership and usage rights over the 'Kirloskar' trademark. Kirloskar Proprietary, incorporated in 1965, was created to own and administer the trademark for the benefit of all Kirloskar Group companies. In April 2018, it asked group entities, including Kirloskar Brothers, to sign fresh user agreements. Kirloskar Brothers refused. They claimed the assignment of the marks was invalid for want of consideration and argued that the rights should revert to them.

In July 2018, Kirloskar Brothers filed a civil suit before the Pune Trial Court. On January 9, 2025, the Trial Court passed an interim order in their favour. It restrained Kirloskar Proprietary from licensing or assigning the trademarks to any third party during the pendency of the suit. This included licensing to other Kirloskar Group companies.

Kirloskar Proprietary appealed. On July 25, 2025, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court modified the Trial Court's injunction. It allowed Kirloskar Proprietary to license the marks to its member companies, provided the use did not relate to a business segment that overlapped with that of Kirloskar Brothers. However, it continued to bar assignments of the mark in overlapping sectors.

A few months later, Kirloskar Brothers moved an application seeking a correction. On October 10, 2025, a different High Court bench modified the earlier order. It added the word “licensing” to the restraint, barring even intra-group licensing for overlapping businesses. This effectively brought back the broader restriction originally imposed by the Trial Court.

Kirloskar Proprietary then approached the Supreme Court. It argued that the October 10 order made the restriction harsher and expanded the scope of the July 25 ruling without fresh factual findings. It said the modification should not have been passed while the appeal was still pending.

The Supreme Court agreed to examine the matter. It issued notice and stayed the operation of the October 10 modification order.

Case Title: KIRLOSKAR PROPRIETARY LIMITED V KIRLOSKAR BROTHERS LIMITED

Case Number: PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 29662-29663/2025

Appearances:

For Petitioner: Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Balbir Singh with advoactes Tushar Ajinkya, Pratiksha Sharma, Sukanya Sehgal, Misha Matlani, Ritu Choudhary and Mukesh Kumar.

For Respondent: Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, with advocates Hiren Kamod, Nishad Nadkarni, Nirupam Lodha, Ashif Navodia, Kshitij Parashar, Gautam Wadhwa, Jaanvi Chopra, Adv.Yash Johri, instructed by Khaitan & Co., with Senior Advocate C Aryama Sundaram and advocates Abhishek Gupta, Ankit Acharya and Ayush Jain.

Click here to read/download order