Fathom Legal

UPI–PPI interoperability has unlocked scale for wallets and closed-loop instruments, but it also raises new compliance questions around KYC tiers, fraud liability, and settlement accountability. With rising UPI fraud incidents reported by banks and NPCI advisories tightening controls, fintechs need stronger transaction monitoring and customer education. Operationally, interoperability blurs the line between wallet providers and payment intermediaries, bringing wallet players closer to banking-grade expectations. Product teams must now design for dispute resolution, refunds, and MDR economics under zero-MDR pressure. Payments may be seamless for users—but compliance is getting heavier behind the scenes.

India’s technology law framework is due for a reset. The proposed Digital India Act, expected to replace the IT Act, 2000, is being positioned as a future-ready framework to address AI governance, platform accountability, competition issues, and digital harms.

For tech companies and startups, this is not just a policy update — it’s a structural shift in how digital businesses will be regulated. The Act is expected to move away from reactive content takedowns toward systemic obligations around risk management, transparency, and accountability.

Even before formal enactment, the direction of travel is clear: governance expectations for digital platforms and AI systems are rising. Leadership teams should start aligning their product design, compliance frameworks, and risk governance with the regulatory future that is being signalled today.

Wishing you a colorful and joyful Holi filled with happiness and positivity. 🎨✨

If AI is on your product roadmap, governance is about to be on your risk register:

India is steadily moving toward a techno-legal AI governance model, and the implications for businesses are much closer than they may seem. The Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser’s recent white paper reflects a shift from reactive, after-the-fact responses to a more proactive, risk-aware approach to AI governance, with an emphasis on managing systemic risks and improving visibility into failures and misuse.

This signals a broader transition from informal “best practices” to structured accountability frameworks that leadership teams will increasingly be expected to align with. While immediate compliance obligations may not yet be in place, the benchmarks for future audits, regulatory scrutiny, and responsible AI expectations are being shaped now. For organisations building or deploying AI, this is the right time to start aligning product roadmaps, governance structures, and risk strategies with the direction of travel.

M&A: Why Legal Discipline Defines Transaction Success

Mergers and acquisitions are no longer only financial decisions—they are complex risk events that require disciplined legal ex*****on at every stage.
A well-managed transaction begins with rigorous due diligence, covering financial exposure, operational liabilities, regulatory non-compliance, IP ownership, tax positions, contractual risks, and cultural integration challenges. Skipping or abbreviating diligence often results in disputes, valuation corrections, and difficult post-closing negotiations.

Equally important is transaction structuring. Selecting the right structure—asset purchase, slump sale, share acquisition, merger, or hybrid forms—determines tax outcomes, regulatory filings, liability transfer, and shareholder approvals.
Post-closing integration then becomes the decisive stage: aligning teams, harmonising policies, rationalising contracts, and embedding unified governance frameworks.

In M&A, legal clarity directly influences deal stability. A transaction is successful not when signed, but when integrated seamlessly and without surprises.