Lenders Law

The Supreme Court of India has, in a recent decision in Gloster Limited vs. Gloster Cables Limited & Ors. , delivered an important clarification on the limits of insolvency jurisdiction , particularly where intellectual property ownership disputes intersect with the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The ruling is significant for lenders, resolution applicants and insolvency professionals, as it reinforces that insolvency forums are not substitutes for civil courts in adjudicating complex title disputes. Background:  The dispute arose in the CIRP of Fort Gloster Industries Limited , where competing claims were raised over the ownership of the trademark “Gloster” . The successful resolution applicant asserted that the trademark was a corporate debtor asset , capable of being transferred under an approved resolution plan. Another party (who was assigned the rights over the trademark vide an assignment agreement, and was also an associate company of t...

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) places a heavy responsibility on the Resolution Professional (RP) to ensure that only eligible Resolution Applicants (RAs) —and their connected persons —participate in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). With the recent IBBI Circular No. IBBI/CIRP/88/2025 dated 18 November 2025 , the scope, depth, and documentation requirements for such due diligence have become even more critical. The RP must directed to place a detailed note on section 29A compliance before the CoC when resolution plans are considered and ensure that deliberations and observations of the CoC are properly recorded in the minutes. This post distils the framework I personally follow as a legal practitioner, incorporating including digital tools like Tofler , ZaubaCorp , public-domain searches, SEBI jurisprudence on “persons acting in concert,” and a printable checklist. Understanding Section 29A and Who It Covers: Section 29A extends ineligibility not only t...