IndiaMART has filed a petition in the Calcutta High Court alleging that OpenAI’s ChatGPT has systematically excluded the B2B marketplace from certain AI-generated responses, reducing the company’s digital visibility and potentially harming its business reputation at a time when generative AI is becoming an important discovery channel for buyers and suppliers.
Court’s initial response
In the first hearing, the Calcutta High Court said IndiaMART appeared to have made out a prima facie case, observing that the alleged omission lacked a clear or logical explanation and could affect the company’s goodwill and commercial interests.
The court did not, however, grant interim relief. Judges reasoned that directing changes to how ChatGPT generates answers without hearing OpenAI would be premature, and scheduled further hearings to allow both sides to present detailed arguments.
Core allegations by IndiaMART
IndiaMART’s petition contends that repeated omission from AI responses amounts to unfair competition and unlawful interference with business. It argues that users increasingly treat AI-generated answers as authoritative, making exclusion more damaging than ranking changes on traditional search engines.
The company also alleges “trade libel” and “injurious falsehood,” saying that omission may mislead users into believing IndiaMART is not relevant or credible in the B2B ecosystem. IndiaMART warned such distortions could disproportionately harm small and medium enterprises that depend on its platform for leads and market access.
Dispute over international trade reports
IndiaMART questioned references to international trade reports on counterfeiting and piracy, asserting it was not given prior notice or an opportunity to respond before those reports were relied upon to justify exclusion from AI outputs.
The company emphasised that it follows established compliance procedures and cooperates with authorities and stakeholders, arguing that relying on external reports without due process would be arbitrary and legally unsustainable.
Implications for AI accountability and the digital economy
Legal experts and industry observers view the case as a potential landmark for AI accountability in India. As generative AI increasingly shapes how users access information, courts are being asked to determine whether algorithmic choices can be challenged under existing laws governing competition, defamation and fair trade.
Unlike conventional search results that present ranked links, chatbots deliver direct, summarised answers. Experts say this heightens the need for transparency and fairness because omissions or selective presentation can subtly influence user perception and commercial outcomes.
Next steps
The forthcoming hearings will centre on OpenAI’s response and technical and policy explanations of how ChatGPT sources and ranks information. The court’s findings could influence how AI platforms operate in India and the standards to which businesses may hold automated decision-making systems.
Meanwhile, the case underscores a broader trend: as AI becomes more integrated into daily digital interactions, questions about fairness, transparency and business impact are likely to surface regularly in Indian courts.
