The Supreme Court recently gave a judgment in the ongoing trademark case between Kirloskar Licensing Dispute Limited and Kirloskar Brothers Limited, giving relief to Kirloskar Proprietary Limited. This case revolves around the well-known term “Kirloskar” and has become a classic example of how big businesses are highly aware of intellectual property rights (IPR) and also proactive about their brand identity. If you want to learn more about the Supreme Court’s recent decision in this case and more details, such as the background of the case and the main reason behind this case, keep reading.
Why Did the Kirloskar Proprietary vs Kirloskar Brothers Trademark Dispute Start?
To understand this case, we first need to know how the Kirloskar licensing dispute started. The Kirloskar Group, one of India’s oldest companies, and over the years expanded its business into areas like engineering, manufacturing, pumps, and energy — all under the “Kirloskar” name. Later, they realized the growing importance of their brand, and the group decided in 1965 to register the “Kirloskar” trademark under Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) to manage and protect it for all group companies. The dispute began when Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL), led by Sanjay Kirloskar, claimed ownership rights over the trademark and argued that KPL had no rights to license or allow other companies to use the brand, especially those in similar businesses. KPL, however, maintained that it is the legal owner of the “Kirloskar” trademark.
The legal fight between the companies started in 2018, when Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) asked other group companies to sign new agreements for using the “Kirloskar” name. However, Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL) refused, which led to a series of court cases. In January 2025, a Pune District Court ordered KPL not to give or license the trademark to any other company until the case was decided. A few months later, in July 2025, the Bombay High Court changed this decision and allowed KPL to license the trademark — but only to companies that were not in the same line of business as KBL. But in the recent Supreme Court order, this case has changed.
How Did the Supreme Court’s Decision Change the Kirloskar Trademark Dispute?
The SC of India gave an important order in the Kirloskar licensing dispute. The Court put a hold (stay) on the Bombay High Court’s previous order that had stopped Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) from licensing/monetizing the “Kirloskar” name to other group companies working in similar business areas as Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL). The Supreme Court said that the High Court had made this order without enough detailed evidence, and while the case was still under appeal. Because of this, the Supreme Court decided to pause the High Court’s order, giving temporary relief to KPL. This means KPL can continue to license the “Kirloskar” trademark under the earlier, less restrictive rules until the final judgment is made. The Court believed that both parties should get a fair and equal chance to present their case before any final decision is made.
Conclusion
The Kirloskar licensing dispute shows how important intellectual property rights are for established Indian businesses. The Supreme Court’s recent decision to stay the Bombay High Court’s order gives temporary relief to Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL) and ensures a fair hearing for both sides. This case serves as a reminder that protecting a brand’s legacy and reputation requires clear legal ownership, proper management, and balanced judicial consideration.