{"id":221572,"date":"2025-01-22T18:05:38","date_gmt":"2025-01-22T18:05:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/2025\/01\/22\/pune-court-grants-interim-relief-to-kirloskar-brothers-in-trademark-dispute\/"},"modified":"2025-01-22T18:05:39","modified_gmt":"2025-01-22T18:05:39","slug":"pune-court-grants-interim-relief-to-kirloskar-brothers-in-trademark-dispute","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/2025\/01\/22\/pune-court-grants-interim-relief-to-kirloskar-brothers-in-trademark-dispute\/","title":{"rendered":"Pune court grants interim relief to Kirloskar Brothers in trademark dispute"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align:center\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/i3.wp.com\/img.etimg.com\/photo\/msid-117464980,imgsize-24538.cms?ssl=1\" class=\"attachment-post-thumbnail size-post-thumbnail wp-post-image\" alt=\"Pune court grants interim relief to Kirloskar Brothers in trademark dispute\" title=\"Pune court grants interim relief to Kirloskar Brothers in trademark dispute\" \/><\/div>\n<div data-brcount=\"15\">The <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/pune-district-court\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Pune District Court<\/a> has given an interim relief to Sanjay Kirloskar-led <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/kirloskar-brothers-limited\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Kirloskar Brothers Limited<\/a> (KBL) in its <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/trademark-dispute\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">trademark dispute<\/a> against Atul and Rahul Kirloskar-led <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/kirloskar-proprietary\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Kirloskar Proprietary<\/a> (KPL).<\/p>\n<p><style><![CDATA[\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand p, #stock_pro.onDemand p{font-size: 14px;line-height: 1.28;}\n    \t    .onDemand .live_stock{left:17px;padding:1px 3px 1px 5px;font-size:12px;font-weight:600;line-height:18px;top:9px}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc{margin:0 auto 0;}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc{color: #024d99;margin-top:10px;}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .crypto .live_stock .lb-icon{8px 6px 5px 3px !important}\n    \t    #sr_widget.crypto.onDemand a.text{border-bottom:1px solid #ccc;padding-bottom:5px;display:block;width:100%}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc .text p, #stock_pro.onDemand .sr_desc .text p{font-size:12px;font-weight:400;}\n    \t]]><\/style>\n<\/p>\n<p><!--\/article_liveblog.cms?msid=105115637&pos=toppotime:1-->The court restrained KPL from using the legacy &#8220;Kirloskar&#8221; trademark, marking a pivotal ruling in the ongoing <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/legal-battle\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">legal battle<\/a> between the two factions over <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/intellectual-property-rights\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">intellectual property rights<\/a> within the Kirloskar Group. <\/p>\n<p>KBL argued that the &#8220;Kirloskar&#8221; trademark was originally owned by KBL and transferred to KPL under a <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/family-arrangement\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">family arrangement<\/a> aimed at safeguarding group intellectual property. According to KBL, this arrangement mandated registered user agreements to ensure continued use of the trademark by group companies. KBL maintained that these agreements were indeterminable and integral to the family arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>The company alleged that KPL\u2019s termination notices in 2018 and 2024 violated this arrangement, thereby nullifying the trademark assignment and reverting ownership to KBL. <\/p>\n<p>KPL contended that the agreements were determinable and cited multiple breaches and non-compliance by KBL as reasons for termination. While KPL has had to create a new trademark for companies led by Atul and Rahul Kirloskar, KBL continues to use the original trademark. <\/p>\n<p><!--\/include_growfast.cms?pagename=article&skipcss=1potime:1--><br \/>The court rejected KPL\u2019s claims, asserting that the agreements were tied to the broader family settlement and could not be terminated arbitrarily. It emphasized that unjust termination would render the assignment agreements invalid. ET\u2019s e-mailed queries to both parties &#8211; KBL and KPL \u2013 remained unanswered until the publication of this report. This dispute is part of a larger conflict between siblings Sanjay, Atul, and Rahul over the 2009 <a ref=\"dofollow\" data-ga-onclick=\"Inarticle articleshow link click#News#href\" href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/topic\/deed-of-family-settlement\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Deed of Family Settlement<\/a> (DFS). The matter is being litigated across various courts, including the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, with this ruling serving as a crucial development in the case.<\/p>\n<style><![CDATA[\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand p, #stock_pro.onDemand p{font-size: 14px;line-height: 1.28;}\n    \t    .onDemand .live_stock{left:17px;padding:1px 3px 1px 5px;font-size:12px;font-weight:600;line-height:18px;top:9px}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc{margin:0 auto 0;}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc{color: #024d99;margin-top:10px;}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .crypto .live_stock .lb-icon{8px 6px 5px 3px !important}\n    \t    #sr_widget.crypto.onDemand a.text{border-bottom:1px solid #ccc;padding-bottom:5px;display:block;width:100%}\n    \t    #sr_widget.onDemand .sr_desc .text p, #stock_pro.onDemand .sr_desc .text p{font-size:12px;font-weight:400;}\n    \t]]><\/style>\n<p><!--\/article_liveblog.cms?msid=105115637&pos=botpotime:1--><\/div>\n<p><br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/news\/india\/pune-court-grants-interim-relief-to-kirloskar-brothers-in-trademark-dispute\/articleshow\/117464980.cms\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Pune District Court has given an interim relief to Sanjay Kirloskar-led Kirloskar Brothers Limited (KBL) in its trademark dispute against Atul and Rahul Kirloskar-led Kirloskar Proprietary (KPL). The court restrained KPL from using the legacy &#8220;Kirloskar&#8221; trademark, marking a pivotal ruling in the ongoing legal battle between the two factions over intellectual property rights [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":221573,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"tdm_status":"","tdm_grid_status":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/img.etimg.com\/photo\/msid-117464980,imgsize-24538.cms","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[602],"tags":[17024,1625,174296,1965,174297,7615,39542,16348,174295,56162,174292,174293,21058,23598,174294,6661,56168,11339,58360],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221572"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=221572"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221572\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":221574,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221572\/revisions\/221574"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/221573"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221572"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221572"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.talkwithrattan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221572"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}