Calcutta High Court Finds Prima Facie Case in IndiaMART's Discrimination Suit Against OpenAI
IndiaMART has filed a discrimination lawsuit against OpenAI at Calcutta High Court, alleging unlawful exclusion from ChatGPT results while competitors remain visible. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur found a strong prima facie case, noting "selective discrimination without logic" but denied interim relief. The case involves claims of trade libel, trademark dilution, and unfair competition, with IndiaMART arguing OpenAI relied on USTR reports without providing notice or response opportunity.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
IndiaMART InterMesh has initiated legal proceedings against OpenAI at the Calcutta High Court, alleging discriminatory exclusion from ChatGPT's search results. The prominent business-to-business platform claims this exclusion has caused significant reputational and commercial damage while other e-commerce platforms continue to appear in AI-generated responses.
Court Proceedings and Judicial Observations
On December 24, Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur heard the matter and made several key observations regarding the case. The court found that IndiaMART had established a strong prima facie case against OpenAI, acknowledging that continued exclusion could result in commercial injury.
| Court Findings: | Details |
|---|---|
| Prima Facie Case: | Strong case established by IndiaMART |
| Discrimination Type: | "Selectively discriminated and unjustifiably excluded without any logic" |
| Potential Impact: | Loss of goodwill, reputation, and business |
| Interim Relief: | Denied by the court |
IndiaMART's Legal Claims
The company, which operates in over 40 countries with thousands of employees, has raised multiple legal grounds for its lawsuit. IndiaMART argues that OpenAI's actions constitute several forms of commercial harm and unfair business practices.
The legal claims include:
- Trade libel through implied disparagement
- Dilution of trademark rights
- Injurious falsehood
- Unfair competition practices
USTR Report Controversy
IndiaMART claims that OpenAI relied on reports from the US Trade Representative's office (USTR) to justify the exclusion. The company argues it was never given notice or an opportunity to respond to allegations in the USTR report, raising procedural fairness concerns.
A significant aspect of the case involves selective treatment allegations. Other entities named in the same USTR reports for counterfeiting and piracy, including DHgate and Pinduoduo, continue to appear in ChatGPT responses, highlighting potential inconsistencies in OpenAI's exclusion policies.
Court's Decision on Interim Relief
Despite finding merit in IndiaMART's arguments, Justice Kapur refused to grant interim relief. The court stated that such an order would effectively grant final relief without hearing the respondent's position. OpenAI remained unrepresented in the proceedings despite being served.
Next Steps
The court has directed IndiaMART's counsel to effect fresh service to OpenAI to ensure proper representation in future proceedings. The matter is scheduled for the next hearing on January 13, 2026, when both parties are expected to present their complete arguments before the court.
Historical Stock Returns for IndiaMART InterMesh
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -0.65% | -0.93% | -3.96% | -11.17% | -1.30% | -28.64% |












































