New Delhi: A huge feud has broken out among the family members over the ownership of Kirloskar Brothers Ltd (KBL). Sanjay Kirloskar, accused Tuesday four firms under his brothers Atul and Rahul of trying to ‘usurp’ its legacy of 130 years. Sanjay Kirloskar said the two brothers are trying to mislead the public an allegation has been refuted by the other side.
As the family feud simmers, KBL in a letter to capital markets regulator Sebi claimed that recent press releases by Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd (KOEL), Kirloskar Industries Ltd (KIL), Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Ltd (KPCL) and Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd (KFIL) ‘have sought to usurp the legacy’ of KBL. Also, they attempted to pass off the legacy and track record of KBL as that of their own, the letter said.
When contacted, a spokesperson of Kirloskar Industries Ltd (KIL) said the letter by KBL to Sebi ‘contains a large number of factual inaccuracies and mis-statements’. “Nothing contained in the entire Press Release even remotely makes any reference to KBL let alone ‘attempting to pass off the legacy and track record of Kirloskar Brothers Limited as that of their own’,” the spokesperson said.
The five firms led by brothers Atul and Rahul Kirloskar had announced July 16 a ‘refresh’ exercise of their respective businesses, with an eye on evolving from engineering-led firms into customer-focussed solution providers. They had stated “Kirloskar’s ‘Limitless’ mission transforms Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd, Kirloskar Chillers Pvt Ltd, Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Ltd, Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd, and Kirloskar Industries Ltd.”
Announcing a refreshed brand identity and colours, these firms had also adopted a new ‘Kirloskar’ logo which has ‘elements of human-centricity and future-readiness, the colours allude to the legacy that the 130-year-old name carries, and the years put in to fulfil the dreams of those it has touched’.
Taking exception to it, KBL’s letter to Sebi said it is ‘clearly a misrepresentation and is misleading’ as KOEL, KIL, KPCL and KFIL were incorporated in 2009, 1978, 1974 and 1991 respectively and do not ‘have nor can it claim to have a 130-year-old legacy’.
Responding to the allegations, the KIL spokesperson said, “The reference to ‘130 year’ is to the ‘name’ Kirloskar and not to any entity or organisation.”
KBL further said KIL is ‘not entitled to be a licensee of the trademark and copyright ‘Kirloskar’, since it is not a shareholder of Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL), and that is a condition precedent for KPL to license its marks to any persons’.
Refuting the allegation, the KIL spokesperson said, “We would also like to note that KIL has been duly licensed by Kirloskar Proprietary Limited (KPL), the owner of the mark ‘Kirloskar’, for using the trademark and copyright ‘Kirloskar’, after having complied with all requisite conditions for grant of such licence by KPL’.
