IndiaMART has approached the Calcutta High Court alleging that OpenAI’s ChatGPT has systematically excluded the company from certain AI-generated responses, reducing its digital visibility and potentially harming its business reputation at a time when generative AI is an important discovery channel for buyers and suppliers.
Court’s initial observations
At the first hearing, the Calcutta High Court said IndiaMART had made out a prima facie case, noting that the alleged exclusion lacked an evident rationale and could affect the company’s goodwill and commercial interests. The court, however, declined to grant interim relief without hearing OpenAI, observing that directing changes to ChatGPT’s response generation before both sides were heard would amount to issuing final relief prematurely. Further hearings have been scheduled for detailed arguments.
Allegations in IndiaMART’s petition
IndiaMART’s petition contends that persistent omission from AI answers constitutes unfair competition and unlawful interference with business. The company argues that AI-generated responses are increasingly perceived as authoritative by users, so exclusion from those answers inflicts harm beyond what would result from a simple decline in search-engine rankings.
The petition also raises claims of trade libel and injurious falsehood, asserting that omission may mislead users into believing IndiaMART is irrelevant or not credible within the B2B marketplace. IndiaMART warned this could distort market competition, particularly affecting small and medium enterprises that depend on the platform for leads.
Disputed reliance on international trade reports
IndiaMART further alleges that references to international trade reports on counterfeiting and piracy have been used to justify its exclusion, without offering the company prior notice or a chance to respond. The company says it follows established compliance procedures and cooperates with authorities, and that reliance on external reports without due process would be arbitrary and legally unsound.
Implications for AI accountability in India
Legal observers view the case as a potentially significant test of how Indian law addresses algorithmic decision-making and transparency in generative AI. Unlike traditional search engines that return ranked links, chatbots deliver concise, authoritative answers—making transparency and fairness in content selection more consequential for business visibility and consumer perception.
Experts note that if courts require greater disclosure of sourcing and ranking criteria, platforms may need to adapt policies and technical practices to meet legal and regulatory expectations in India’s growing digital economy.
Next steps
The upcoming hearings will focus on OpenAI’s response and technical as well as policy explanations about how ChatGPT sources and presents information. The court’s rulings could influence how AI platforms operate in India and set precedents for how businesses seek redress against automated exclusions and algorithmic harms.
