In Brief
In an insolvency dispute, the Supreme Court examined whether the NCLT had jurisdiction under IBC Section 60(5)(c) to declare ownership of the trademark "Gloster." The Court held that while this provision grants broad jurisdiction over insolvency-related matters, the NCLT cannot decide disputes that lack a direct nexus to insolvency proceedings. Here, the trademark ownership dispute did not arise solely from insolvency; the approved resolution plan itself recognized rival claims. Accordingly, the Court found the NCLT lacked jurisdiction to make a conclusive declaration favoring one party. The judgment reaffirms that NCLT's residuary jurisdiction must remain anchored in insolvency context and cannot usurp other forums' authority over standalone property disputes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.