Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL) recently announced a significant development in its ongoing legal proceedings. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has dismissed the company's appeal against an interim order dated October 5, 2023, as infructuous. This dismissal comes in the wake of the main Company Petition No. 193/2017 being finally decided on May 21, 2024.

Key Details of the Dismissal

• Date of Dismissal: September 19, 2025
• Reason for Dismissal: The main petition had already been decided, making the appeal against the interim order redundant
• Appellants: Kirloskar Brothers Limited and its Managing Director, Sanjay Kirloskar
• Original Order: Interim order passed by NCLT on October 5, 2023

Impact on Business Operations

KBL has stated that it does not anticipate any material impact on its business operations from this development. The company has committed to keeping the exchanges informed of any material developments related to this matter.

Additional Corporate Updates

In addition to the NCLAT appeal dismissal, KBL has also reported other significant corporate actions:

Change in Senior Management

• Mr. Supriyo Bhowmik, Vice President & Head of Engineered Service Division & Customer Support & Services, has resigned due to personal reasons.
• Effective Date: October 14, 2025 (close of business hours)

Compliance Certificate

• KBL has submitted a Compliance Certificate under Regulation 74(5) of the SEBI (Depositories and Participants) Regulations, 2018 for the quarter ended September 30, 2025.
• The certificate confirms that securities received for dematerialization have been processed and listed on the relevant stock exchanges.

These developments underscore Kirloskar Brothers' commitment to transparency and adherence to regulatory requirements. While the legal matter has reached a conclusion, the company continues to manage its operations and corporate governance effectively.

Investors and stakeholders are advised to monitor any further announcements from the company regarding these matters.

The Bombay High Court has issued a significant modification to its earlier order regarding the use of Kirloskar trademarks, impacting the dynamics within the Kirloskar group of companies. This development comes as part of an ongoing legal dispute involving Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL) and Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL).

Key Points of the Modified Order

• Original Order Date: July 25
• Petitioner: Kirloskar Brothers Limited

Details of the Modification

The court has now expanded its restrictions on KPL's ability to use the Kirloskar trademarks. The key changes are as follows:

Implications of the Order

1. Restricted Trademark Usage: KPL is now restrained from both licensing and assigning Kirloskar marks to other group companies for businesses that compete or overlap with Kirloskar Brothers Limited.

2. Limited Licensing Rights: While KPL can still create licenses for Kirloskar marks in favor of its member companies as per its articles of association, it cannot extend this right to other Kirloskar group companies that might compete with KBL.

3. Financial Impact: Kirloskar Brothers Limited has stated that the expected financial implications of this litigation cannot be determined at this time.

Background of the Dispute

This modification is part of an ongoing legal battle within the Kirloskar group. The dispute traces back to earlier court proceedings, including:

• An order by the Pune Court on January 9
• The Bombay High Court's initial ad-interim order on July 25
• Previous disclosures by Kirloskar Brothers Limited on July 4, 2018, January 21, and August 12

Conclusion

This latest court order represents a significant development in the trademark dispute within the Kirloskar group. It underscores the complexities involved in managing intellectual property rights within large business conglomerates, especially when different group companies have overlapping or competing interests. The full impact of this decision on the operations and relationships within the Kirloskar group remains to be seen, and further developments in this ongoing legal matter are likely to be closely watched by stakeholders and industry observers alike.