Case Analysis: Gloster Limited V. Gloster Cables Limited & Ors: Trademarks As Assets In Corporate Insolvency
Ishita Malhotra, KPMSOL, NMIMS University, Mumbai
Citation - 2026 INSC 81
Court - Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Bench - K.V. Viswanathan, J. and J.B. Pardiwala,
Date of Judgement - 22 January, 2026
Case Numbers - Civil Appeal No. 2996 of 2024 (Gloster Ltd. v. Gloster Cables Ltd. & Ors.), with Civil Appeal No. 4493 of 2024 (Gloster Cables Ltd. v. Gloster Ltd.)
Introduction
The convergence of insolvency and Intellectual Property law has emerged to be one of the most contested and complex areas in the Indian jurisprudence. This intersection has evolved over the years with a major contribution by the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in “Gloster Limited v. Gloster Cables Limited”1. The controversy significantly revolved around the proprietary right over the trademark “GLOSTER” bearing No. 6907722, while the deeper question before the court was more fundamental in nature — whether insolvency firms have a jurisdiction over deciding complex questions of Intellectual property merely because one of the parties is undergoing a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP).
The case is a significant delineation on the jurisdictional powers of the National Company law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India set aside the findings of the NCLT and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), and further held that both the tribunals had exceeded theirrespective jurisdictions by declaring the ownership of the trademark “GLOSTER”.
This judgement offers insights on how trademark is dealt with in insolvency proceedings and the jurisdictional boundaries of insolvency tribunals. This case law analysis focuses on facts, legal issues, judicial reasoning and broader implications of the judgement with a focus on the treatment of trademarks in insolvency proceedings.
