This guide is for complainants and respondents in Indian domain disputes. If you have received an INDRP notice, go straight to the response section — the reply deadline is short and the arbitrator’s award clock is already running. If you are unsure whether the INDRP applies, start with the comparison against the UDRP.
Quick answer: what the INDRP is and what it can do
The .IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (INDRP) is the compulsory arbitration procedure for disputes over .in and .Bharat domain names, run by the National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI). A complainant must prove three elements: the domain is identical or confusingly similar to a name, trademark, or service mark in which the complainant has rights; the registrant has no rights or legitimate interests; and the domain was registered or used in bad faith (or for an unlawful purpose). The official fee is INR 30,000 plus GST — INR 10,000 to the Registry and INR 20,000 to the arbitrator. The arbitrator must pass an award within 60 days of commencement, extendable by 30 days in exceptional cases. The remedy is transfer or cancellation. Awards can be challenged in the Delhi High Court under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Key facts at a glance
| Fact | Detail |
|---|---|
| Policy | .IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (INDRP) |
| Scope | .in, .co.in, .net.in, .org.in, .firm.in, .gen.in, .ind.in, and .Bharat (Indian scripts) |
| Test | (i) identical/confusingly similar; (ii) no rights/legitimate interests; (iii) registered or used in bad faith |
| Procedure | Arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 |
| Fee | INR 30,000 + GST (INR 10,000 Registry + INR 20,000 arbitrator) |
| Hearing fee | INR 2,000 + GST per hearing, maximum two |
| Word limit | 5,000 words per submission, excluding annexes |
| Annexure limit | 100 pages |
| Award deadline | 60 days from commencement, extendable by 30 days |
| Remedy | Transfer or cancellation; costs at the arbitrator’s discretion |
| Post-award lock | 90 days |
| Court challenge | Delhi High Court under the 1996 Act |
What is the INDRP?
NIXI and the .IN Registry
The .in country-code top-level domain is managed by the National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI) through the .IN Registry. NIXI is a company registered under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. It accredits registrars and administers the INDRP.
The INDRP is incorporated by reference into the Registry Accreditation Agreement and into every .in domain registration. By registering a .in domain, the registrant agrees to submit to arbitration if a complainant asserts the three elements.
The .in and .Bharat namespace
The INDRP applies to every domain in the .in family: .in, .co.in, .net.in, .org.in, .firm.in, .gen.in, .ind.in, and the Indian-script equivalents. It also applies to .Bharat domains, which are available in all Indian languages.
Arbitration under the 1996 Act
The INDRP is not an administrative panel procedure like the UDRP. It is arbitration conducted under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by the 2015 Amendment Act. The arbitrator is appointed by NIXI from its empanelled list. The proceedings are governed by the INDRP Policy, the INDRP Rules of Procedure, and the 1996 Act.
This matters for several reasons:
- The arbitrator’s award is an arbitral award, enforceable under the 1996 Act.
- The award can be challenged in the Delhi High Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act.
- The procedure is more formal than a UDRP panel, but still largely written and email-based.
.in dispute? The fee is INR 30,000 and the award clock is 60 days. We handle INDRP arbitrations from complaint to award. Book an INDRP review →
The three INDRP elements
Identical or confusingly similar
The domain must be identical or confusingly similar to a name, trademark, or service mark in which the complainant has rights. The threshold is comparable to the UDRP. The .in suffix is disregarded.
There is no requirement that the mark be registered in India, or registered at all. Rights in a mark anywhere, including unregistered rights built on use, can support a complaint. This is broader than the URS and more flexible than some ccTLD policies.
No rights or legitimate interests
The complainant must show the registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain. The INDRP recognises the same safe harbours as the UDRP:
- Bona fide use, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain in connection with a genuine offering of goods or services before notice of the dispute.
- Being commonly known by the domain, even without trademark rights.
- Legitimate noncommercial or fair use, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or tarnish the mark.
The burden shifts to the respondent once the complainant makes a prima facie case.
Registered or used in bad faith
Quick answer: The INDRP requires bad faith in registration or use, not both. The “or” is disjunctive. A domain registered innocently but later used to target the complainant can satisfy the third element.
The INDRP lists non-exhaustive bad-faith circumstances:
- Registering primarily to sell, rent, or transfer the domain to the complainant or a competitor for profit.
- Registering to prevent the mark owner from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain, as part of a pattern.
- Registering to disrupt a competitor’s business.
- Using the domain to attract, for commercial gain, internet users by creating confusion with the complainant’s mark.
- Registering or using the domain for an unlawful purpose.
The “unlawful purpose” limb is broader than the UDRP and can capture domains used for fraud, phishing, or illegal content.
INDRP is arbitration, not a UDRP panel. The “registered or used” test, the 5,000-word limit, and the 60-day award change the strategy. Ask us to assess your case →
INDRP vs UDRP: the critical differences
| Feature | INDRP | UDRP |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Arbitration under the 1996 Act | Administrative panel |
| Test | Three elements, registered or used in bad faith | Three elements, registered and used in bad faith |
| Word limit | 5,000 words per submission | 5,000 words for response (WIPO); varies |
| Annexure limit | 100 pages | Provider-specific |
| Fee | INR 30,000 + GST | US$1,300–1,500 (WIPO/Forum) |
| Award deadline | 60 days, extendable by 30 | About two months |
| Remedy | Transfer or cancellation; costs at discretion | Transfer or cancellation |
| Post-award | 90-day lock; Delhi High Court challenge | 10-business-day court window |
| Providers | NIXI (single administrator) | Multiple providers |
Arbitration, not administrative panel
The INDRP is arbitration. The arbitrator’s award is binding and enforceable, subject to challenge in the Delhi High Court. The procedure is more formal, and the arbitrator has more discretion on costs and procedure than a UDRP panel.
The 5,000-word limit
The INDRP caps pleadings at 5,000 words per submission, excluding annexes, and annexures at 100 pages. This is tighter than the UDRP’s WIPO response limit in practice, and it forces discipline. The best submissions are structured around the three elements, not the parties’ histories.
The 60-day award
The arbitrator must pass an award within 60 days of commencement, extendable by 30 days in exceptional cases. This is a short clock. A missed reply date can cost the respondent the domain.
Court challenges
An INDRP award can be challenged in the Delhi High Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. Recent decisions show that courts will set aside awards where the arbitrator’s bad-faith analysis is insufficient (Microsoft’s exceltotally.in) and will uphold awards where the arbitrator’s factual findings are plausible (Oracle’s exadata.in).
The INDRP is not a UDRP clone. The arbitration framework, word limits, and court challenges are different. Ask us which procedure fits →
Standing: who can file
Registered and unregistered rights
The complainant must have rights in a name, trademark, or service mark. The rights can be registered or unregistered. There is no requirement that the mark be registered in India. A foreign trademark, a common-law mark, or a business name can support a complaint if it is enforceable and distinctive.
No requirement of Indian registration
This flexibility is important for foreign brand owners. Unlike the .ca CDRP, which has a Canadian Presence Requirement, the INDRP does not require Indian registration or residency. A complainant anywhere can file if it has rights in the name.
INDRP standing is broader than some ccTLDs. We test rights and evidence before you file. Assess your standing →
Filing an INDRP complaint
Complaint contents
A complaint must include:
- The complainant’s details and authorised representative.
- The disputed domain name(s).
- The rights relied on.
- The three-element analysis.
- The evidence, in numbered annexes.
- The remedy sought: transfer or cancellation.
- The power of attorney.
- The fee.
The 5,000-word and 100-page limits
The complaint is capped at 5,000 words, excluding annexures, and annexures at 100 pages. The complaint should set out the rights, the three elements with evidence, the remedy, and contact details for service.
Fees: INR 30,000 plus GST
The official fee is INR 30,000 plus GST — INR 10,000 to the Registry and INR 20,000 to the arbitrator. A personal hearing, if requested, costs INR 2,000 plus GST per hearing, with a maximum of two hearings.
Registry compliance and arbitrator appointment
The Registry checks the complaint for compliance and notifies defects within five working days. Once the complaint is in order, NIXI appoints an arbitrator from its empanelled list within five working days and notifies the parties. The complainant then sends the accepted complaint to the arbitrator within two working days and serves soft and hard copies on the registrant, filing proof of service.
INR 30,000 plus GST covers the Registry and arbitrator fees. We confirm the current schedule before filing. Start an INDRP assessment →
The INDRP response
The arbitrator’s notice
The arbitrator issues notice to the registrant within three working days of receiving the complaint. That date is the commencement of the arbitration. The notice fixes the time for the registrant’s reply.
The reply timeline
The reply deadline is set by the arbitrator’s notice. Recent awards show replies directed within roughly 15 to 20 days of the notice, depending on the arbitrator’s directions. The respondent should treat the date in the notice as the hard deadline.
Ex parte default
If the registrant does not respond, or ignores the arbitrator’s directions, the arbitrator proceeds ex parte and decides on the complaint alone. The arbitrator still reviews the complaint for sufficiency, but the respondent’s evidence is absent from the record. Default is a serious risk.
Received an INDRP notice? The reply deadline is short. We review the notice and build a response around the three elements. Book a deadline review →
The arbitration proceeding
Written submissions and hearings
The proceeding is primarily written and conducted by email. Hearings are held only if the arbitrator considers one necessary on a party’s request. There can be at most two hearings, each carrying a fee of INR 2,000 plus GST.
The 60-day award clock
The arbitrator must pass an award within 60 days of commencement, extendable by 30 days in exceptional cases with written justification. This is a short clock, and it shapes the strategy: the evidence must be ready at filing, and the response must be focused.
The award
The award addresses the three elements, the evidence, and the remedy. It is published on the Registry’s website. The award can order transfer, cancellation, and costs at the arbitrator’s discretion.
Remedies and the 90-day lock
The INDRP can order:
- Transfer of the domain to the complainant.
- Cancellation of the domain registration.
- Costs at the arbitrator’s discretion.
There are no damages. After the award, the domain is locked for 90 days from the award. During that period, the award can be challenged in the Delhi High Court. If no challenge is filed, the Registry implements the award.
Challenging an award in the Delhi High Court
The Microsoft exceltotally.in decision
In March 2026, a sole arbitrator ruled in Microsoft’s favour and directed transfer of exceltotally.in. The Delhi High Court set aside the award in June 2026. The Court held that confusing similarity with Microsoft’s “EXCEL” trademark, by itself, was not enough to establish bad faith under the INDRP. The arbitrator had not made the required finding on bad faith.
Lesson: Similarity alone is not bad faith. The award must rest on evidence of bad-faith registration or use.
The Oracle exadata.in decision
Oracle filed an INDRP complaint seeking transfer of exadata.in. The arbitrator rejected the complaint, finding that the threshold for bad-faith registration or use had not been met. Oracle challenged the award in the Delhi High Court. In May 2026, the Court refused to interfere, holding that the arbitrator had arrived at a plausible factual conclusion and that the court would not substitute its view on the evidence.
Lesson: Courts defer to plausible arbitral findings. A well-reasoned award is difficult to set aside.
Lessons for complainants and respondents
- Complainants: Build the bad-faith case with evidence, not just similarity. The Microsoft decision shows that a transfer can be reversed if the award does not address bad faith properly.
- Respondents: A reasoned defence that creates a plausible factual basis for legitimate interest or no bad faith can survive both the arbitration and a court challenge.
- Both sides: The Delhi High Court is the relevant court for challenges under the 1996 Act.
Lost an award? The challenge route is the Delhi High Court. We assess the grounds and act within the limitation period. Discuss your options →
Costs and timeline
| Stage | Typical duration |
|---|---|
| Complaint and compliance | 5 working days |
| Arbitrator appointment | 5 working days |
| Notice and reply | 15–20 days |
| Award | 60 days from commencement, +30 days in exceptional cases |
| Post-award lock | 90 days |
| Cost item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Official fee | INR 30,000 + GST (INR 10,000 Registry + INR 20,000 arbitrator) |
| Hearing fee | INR 2,000 + GST per hearing, maximum two |
| Legal fees | Additional; varies by complexity |
Illustrative INDRP awards
Workday, Inc. v. Navin Verma (workdayindia.in, Award 21 May 2026)
The respondent registered workdayindia.in on 29 December 2025. NIXI appointed the arbitrator on 24 April 2026. The respondent replied the same day stating it did not wish to contest and was willing to transfer the domain. The arbitrator issued notice on 27 April 2026, directing a reply by 15 May 2026. No proper reply was filed. The arbitrator proceeded on the merits and passed the award on 21 May 2026, within the 60-day timeline.
Lesson: The INDRP process moves quickly. A respondent who does not file a proper reply faces an award on the complaint alone.
Microsoft exceltotally.in
The arbitrator transferred the domain; the Delhi High Court set the award aside because bad faith was not established beyond similarity.
Lesson: Bad faith must be proved, not assumed from similarity.
Oracle exadata.in
The arbitrator rejected Oracle’s complaint; the Delhi High Court upheld the award as a plausible factual conclusion.
Lesson: A reasoned defence can survive both arbitration and judicial review.
Complainant checklist
- Rights: Registered or unregistered rights in a name, trademark, or service mark.
- Confusing similarity: The domain is identical or confusingly similar; the
.insuffix is disregarded. - No legitimate interest: Prima facie case based on WHOIS, website use, parking, and any known relationship.
- Bad faith: Evidence of bad-faith registration or use, or an unlawful purpose.
- Word limit: Complaint within 5,000 words; annexures within 100 pages.
- Fee: INR 30,000 + GST ready.
- Evidence file: Numbered annexes with dates and sources.
- Court risk: The award can be challenged; the bad-faith analysis must be robust.
Ready to file an INDRP complaint? We test the three elements and the bad-faith evidence before you commit. Start an INDRP assessment →
Respondent checklist
- Notice: Identify the reply deadline in the arbitrator’s notice.
- Rights/legitimate interests: Bona fide use, commonly known, fair use.
- No bad faith: Priority, genuine reason for the name, no targeting.
- Word limit: Reply within 5,000 words; annexures within 100 pages.
- Ex parte risk: Do not ignore the notice.
- Court challenge: If you lose, the Delhi High Court is the route.
Received an INDRP notice? Do not default. Book a deadline review →
How counsel.domains can help
If you are planning an INDRP complaint, we test the three elements and the bad-faith evidence, and draft within the 5,000-word limit.
If you have received an INDRP notice, we review the reply deadline, build a focused response, and protect against ex parte default.
If you lost an award, we assess the grounds for a Delhi High Court challenge under the 1996 Act.
counsel.domains Domain name disputes, worldwide. Talk to counsel about a .in dispute → · [email protected]
Disclaimer: This website provides general information about domain name dispute resolution. It is not legal advice and does not create a professional relationship. Procedures and fees change; check the relevant policy and provider before acting. counsel.domains is not affiliated with NIXI, the .IN Registry, or any arbitrator or dispute-resolution provider.