JFE Steel Corporation v. Assistant Controller Of Patents and Designs and Anr.

When a government decides to dissolve an entire appellate tribunal, what happens to the mountain of cases already pending before it? For founders, IP professionals, and businesses caught in the transition, the answer can mean the difference between protecting their intellectual property and losing it to procedural limbo. The matter involving JFE Steel Corporation offers a revealing glimpse into this very real challenge.

JFE Steel Corporation, a major steel manufacturer, found itself in a legal proceeding before the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. The dispute was originally before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), which had served as the dedicated appellate forum for IP matters in India. However, the legal landscape shifted dramatically with the enactment of the Tribunals Reform Act, 2021, which abolished several tribunals, including the IPAB. As a result, pending matters like JFE Steel's had to be transferred to the appropriate High Courts. In this instance, the case was transferred to the High Court at Calcutta.

The core legal friction here was not between two competing parties over a trademark or patent, but rather a procedural one — the question of how to seamlessly transition a pending IP matter from a now-defunct tribunal to a High Court that had never handled it before. The legal framework demanded that the High Court step into the shoes of the IPAB and treat the transferred matter as if it had been pending before it all along. The challenge was ensuring proper procedural continuity: issuing fresh notices, compiling the record, and setting the stage for substantive hearings.

On 31 January 2023, the High Court at Calcutta addressed the procedural status of the transferred matter. Recognizing that the case had come to it directly from the abolished IPAB, the court directed its Commercial Appellate Division to take charge of the administrative steps. Specifically, the court ordered that notices be issued to the concerned parties and that a compliance report be filed before the matter could be listed for the next hearing. The court scheduled the case to be taken up again in March 2023. The matter remains pending, with its substantive resolution yet to unfold.

For founders, startup leaders, and IP professionals, this case is a critical reminder: when a legal forum is restructured or abolished, your pending IP rights do not vanish — but they do require immediate procedural attention. If your matter was before the IPAB, it has likely been transferred to a High Court, and you must proactively ensure that notices are properly served, records are compiled, and your case is listed for hearing. Do not assume that the transfer is automatic or seamless. Engage counsel familiar with the Commercial Appellate Division of the relevant High Court, track the listing dates, and file compliance reports on time. In the post-Tribunals Reform Act era, procedural vigilance is not optional — it is the lifeline of your intellectual property.