Kolkata, December 24, 2025 - Inside a courtroom that felt unusually tense for a pre-vacation hearing, the Calcutta High Court raised pointed questions over IndiaMART’s alleged exclusion from visibility on OpenAI’s ChatGPT platform. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, hearing the matter on the Original Side, remarked that there appears to be a “strong prima facie case” of unfair treatment, even as he held back from granting immediate relief.
The dispute revolves around IndiaMART’s claim that its listings are deliberately not appearing on ChatGPT search responses while other e-commerce platforms continue to surface normally. The company argues this is harming its goodwill and market presence.
Background
IndiaMART, a major B2B marketplace with operations in around 40 countries and a user ecosystem of SMEs, says the alleged exclusion has no legal basis. The company stressed that its brand is recognized as a “well-known mark” under the Trade Marks Act and has been consistently used without interruption.
Read also:- J&K Police Weapon Snatching Case: High Court Restores Dismissal After Enquiry Scrutiny
At the heart of the grievance is a United States Trade Representatives (USTR) review that reportedly features IndiaMART. The petition claims the respondents - OpenAI Inc. and the associated operating entity - have been relying on that review without even informing IndiaMART or giving any chance to dispute its contents.
In everyday language: IndiaMART is saying “We were judged without being heard.”
The platform points out that companies like DHGate, Pinduoduo, Shopee, and Taobao, also named in the USTR list, still appear on ChatGPT search results, which IndiaMART describes as “inconsistent and discriminatory.”
Court’s Observations
Justice Kapur didn’t mince words. He noted the absence of representation from the respondents and expressed concern over the lack of explanation for why IndiaMART alone was excluded. As heard in court, “blind reliance” on a foreign review without independent assessment raised obvious fairness questions.
“It prima facie appears that the petitioner is being selectively discriminated and excluded without logic,” the bench observed.
Another striking point was the reference to a Government of India press release, which reportedly clarified that USTR reports are not binding on Indian entities. The court flagged that this aspect seems not to have been considered by OpenAI before acting.
Still, Justice Kapur was careful not to overstep the boundaries of early proceedings:
“Any relief sought would virtually amount to a final decree at this stage,” he noted, meaning granting immediate orders would be premature without hearing the other side.
Read also:- Punjab and Haryana High Court on Death Reference: CCTV Lapses, Evidence Gaps Lead to Modified Verdict
In simple terms: the court is saying - “This looks unfair, but we need both sides in the room before we act.”
Decision
The court ultimately declined to issue interim relief for now, citing procedural fairness, but directed IndiaMART to serve fresh notice to OpenAI via courier, email, and any other effective mode. The matter is now scheduled to be heard after the winter vacation on January 13, 2026.
For the moment, the case sits in a holding pattern - but with clear judicial concern noted on record.
Case Title: IndiaMART InterMESH Limited vs OpenAI Inc. & Others
