One Platform
THE PROBLEM
A Hole in the Courtroom
Every incumbent legal AI vendor solves a slice of the problem well — and locks you in doing it. None combine the strengths without the tradeoffs.
Pricing that punishes growth
Strong generation quality, but opaque per-seat pricing that scales against you the more your team actually uses it.
Extraction locked to rigid templates
A capable extraction engine, but rigid contract templates and per-document licensing that gets expensive fast.
CLM with no research or drafting
Mature contract lifecycle workflow, but no research or drafting capability — you still need a second vendor.
Built for the wrong jurisdiction
Capable research assistants, but built for foreign practice contexts, not India's statutory and procedural landscape.
eDiscovery in its own silo
Deep eDiscovery tooling, disconnected from drafting, CLM, or practice management — another silo, another login.
No shared audit trail
Each tool keeps its own record of what was generated and reviewed — nothing you can hand a court as one coherent trail.
The result: firms stitch together four or five subscriptions, none of which share an audit trail, a citation standard, or a pricing model you can predict.
PLATFORM
Four modules. One system.
Each module is built to the same evidentiary standard and shares the same audit trail — not bolted together after the fact.
Research & Drafting
Citation-grounded generation, domain fine-tuned.
- Citation-grounded generation checked against source
- Domain-fine-tuned model for Indian statutory and case law
- Skills-based task structure for repeatable drafting workflows
Contract Lifecycle
End-to-end CLM with clause-level judgment.
- End-to-end contract lifecycle workflow
- Auto-approval with clause-level escalation to human reviewers
- AI-assisted playbook generation from existing precedent
eDiscovery & Review
High-throughput triage beyond keyword search.
- High-throughput document triage — 1M+ documents per hour
- Anomaly detection layered over traditional keyword search
- Review workflows built for large, contested document sets
Practice Management
Matter-aware, collaborative, transparently priced.
- Matter- and client-contextual answers across modules
- Multi-user collaborative workspace
- Published, usage-based pricing — no opaque per-seat tiers
THE CORE
The Evidence & Citation Gating Core
Every module sits behind the same gate before a response ever reaches an advocate. This is the platform's core IP — hallucination risk is contained structurally, at the architecture level, rather than patched inside each module separately.
One gate, every module
Research, CLM, eDiscovery, and practice management all route through the same Evidence & Citation Gating Core before a response is returned. There is no module-specific exception path.
Citations checked against source, not asserted
Generated claims are verified against the underlying knowledge graph and source documents before delivery — a citation that can't be traced is not returned as fact.
Immutable, cryptographically chained audit trail
Every gated response writes an audit log entry, chained cryptographically so the record of what was generated, checked, and returned cannot be silently altered after the fact.
Why human review stays mandatory
Structural gating reduces hallucination risk — it does not eliminate professional judgment. Human review by a registered advocate remains a required step in every workflow, by design, not as a disclaimer.
HOW IT WORKS
What happens when you submit a query
- 01
Query submitted
An advocate submits a research question, drafting task, review request, or contract query from any given platform module.
- 02
Routed by complexity
The request is routed to the right processing tier based on its complexity, whether routine, standard, or complex.
- 03
Evidence gating check
Before any response is finalized, its citations are checked against the knowledge graph by the Evidence Gating Core.
- 04
Audited Before Response
The verified response returns to the advocate, while an immutable log entry records what was generated and checked.
- 05
Human review
The advocate reviews the response before it informs any filing, advice, or decision, since this review stays mandatory.
COMPARISON
Built vs. bought — what changes
| Feature | This platformRecommended | Typical incumbent approach |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Published, usage-based | Opaque, per-seat — typically $500–1,500/seat |
| Data residency | India-native (ap-south-1 / ap-south-2 DR) | Varies by vendor, often outside India |
| Module coverage | Research, CLM, eDiscovery, practice management — one system | Single-purpose — research, CLM, or eDiscovery separately |
| Hallucination containment | Structural — one gating core in front of every module | Per-module, inconsistently applied if present at all |
| Audit trail | Immutable, cryptographically chained, shared across modules | Siloed per vendor, if available at all |
| Vendor lock-in | None — single platform, single contract | Multiple vendors, multiple contracts, multiple renewals |
Swipe to compare →
COMPLIANCE & SECURITY
Institutional-grade trust, not an afterthought
This is a ministry-mandated platform for registered advocates. Compliance is a primary trust signal here, not marketing copy.
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 — Annex A controls
- A.8.24 — Cryptographic controls and encryption of data at rest and in transit
- A.9 — Access control, least-privilege enforcement across modules
- A.17 — Business continuity and disaster recovery planning
DPDP Act 2023
- Data handling practices aligned to India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act
- Purpose limitation and consent principles applied to platform data flows
CERT-In log retention
- Minimum 180-day audit and security log retention
- Logs chained into the platform's immutable audit trail
Data residency
- Primary region: India (ap-south-1)
- Disaster recovery: India (ap-south-2)
- No data leaves Indian jurisdiction by default
PRICING
Published, usage-based — by design
The industry's opaque per-seat pricing is exactly what this platform was built to move away from. Instead of $500–1,500 per seat regardless of use, pricing scales with actual usage and stays published, not negotiated behind closed doors.
Usage-based
Pay for what the platform actually processes — queries, documents reviewed, contracts managed — not a flat per-seat fee regardless of activity.
Transparent
Rates are published, not negotiated case-by-case behind a sales call.
No per-seat lock-in
Scale usage up or down without renegotiating a seat-count contract.
Final tiered rates are being finalized ahead of rollout. This section reflects the pricing model — usage-based and transparent — as adopted, not final published figures.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Built for India's registered advocates.
Get Started to see the platform, or review the technical documentation before you do.