SC makes interim stay absolute in Kirloskar trademark dispute, seeks speedy High Court decision

New Delhi [India], January 13 (ANI): The Supreme Court of India has made absolute its earlier interim stay on a Bombay High Court order that had expanded restrictions on the use of the "Kirloskar" trademark within the Kirloskar group, while requesting the High Court to decide the pending commercial appeal expeditiously.
A Bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan disposed of the appeals filed by Kirloskar Proprietary Limited against Kirloskar Brothers Limited, holding that the operative portion of its interim order dated October 17, 2025, would continue to operate, subject to the final outcome of the appeal pending before the Bombay High Court.
The dispute stems from a suit instituted by Kirloskar Brothers Limited seeking a temporary injunction to restrain Kirloskar Proprietary Limited from creating any third-party interests in respect of the "Kirloskar" trademarks, including by way of licensing or assignment. In January 2025, a Pune trial court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining KPL from licensing or assigning the trademarks.
KPL challenged this order before the Bombay High Court. By an order dated July 25, 2025, the High Court stayed the trial court's injunction to a limited extent, permitting KPL to license the Kirloskar mark to its member companies in accordance with its Articles of Association, while restraining the assignment of the mark for use in similar or overlapping businesses of KBL. However, by a subsequent modification order dated October 10, 2025, the High Court expanded the restraint to also injunct the licensing of the trademark to group companies.
Aggrieved by the expanded restraint, KPL approached the Supreme Court. In its interim order dated October 17, 2025, the apex court stayed the operation of the October 10 modification, observing prima facie that the High Court ought not to have widened the scope of restraint when the appeal was still pending and without a full discussion on prior licensing practices within the group. The Court also noted the distinction between licensing, which amounts to a grant of privilege while ownership remains with the licensor, and assignment, which may involve transfer of rights.
By its final order dated January 9, 2026, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeals by making the interim stay absolute. The Court clarified that none of its observations should be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the dispute and that all contentions of the parties would remain open for consideration by the High Court.
Taking note of the commercial implications involved, the apex court requested the Bombay High Court to ensure that the pending appeal is decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date the Supreme Court's order is placed before it.
Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL) is led by its Chairman and Managing Director, Sanjay Kirloskar, while Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) is headed by Atul Kirloskar and Rahul Kirloskar. Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Balbir Singh appeared for KPL, while KBL was represented by senior advocates including Gopal Subramanian, Amit Sibal and Aarohi Bhalla. (ANI)