Skip to content

Legal Tech / Legal research

Lexlegis.ai (MIRA / On-Desk)

Lexlegis.ai · HQ IN · founded 2024 · Last checked 2026-10-07

Visit website

Last checked = the date we last re-opened the vendor's published pages. Facts are what the vendor documents, not what it claims in marketing.

Indian legal AI (Ask, Interact, Draft) plus a practice-management operations layer, marketed as a Legal OS of 30+ apps; On-Desk (Feb 2026) offers air-gapped, on-device deployment on NVIDIA DGX Spark.

Category
Legal research · Indian case law, drafting, document analysis, practice management, air-gapped on-prem
Built for
Small firms & solos, Mid-sized firms, In-house legal, Courts
Model providers (disclosed)
NVIDIA (On-Desk)
Data residency options
India, EU, US, APAC, UK, customer cloud, air-gapped, on-premises
Pricing
per-seat · Four plans from ₹9,000 (~$95) per user/month; higher tiers raise limits; annual billing saves 20%; 7-day free trial
Markets
INDIA
Last checked
07 Oct 2026

What the vendor documents

Recorded from the vendor's own trust, privacy and terms pages. "Not disclosed" means we found no public statement, not that the control is absent.

No training on customer data
documented yessource
SOC 2
documented yessource
ISO 27001
documented yessource
ISO 42001
not disclosedsource
Zero retention with model providers
not disclosedsource
DPA offered
not disclosedsource
Private deployment
documented yessource

What the public documentation states

Lexlegis.ai is now presented on its homepage as a Legal OS: an intelligence layer (Ask for cited legal research, Interact for document analysis, Draft for first drafts) and an operations layer for practice management, billing, calendar and intake, marketed as 30+ apps on one login. The homepage states customer content never trains shared models and is stored in the region the deployment requires, with SaaS, VPC on a sovereign or own cloud, on-premises and air-gapped options. On 2026-10-07 the Trust Center listed ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 as compliance documents, plus GDPR, CCPA and (on the homepage) DPDP; this is a change from the prior "SOC 2 Type II audit window active, report expected Q3 2026." Encryption at rest, data erasure and audit logging appear as Trust Center controls. Pricing is published as four plans from ₹9,000 (~$95) per user per month with a 7-day free trial and a 20% annual-billing discount. The underlying fine-tuned open-source foundation-model providers are not named, and no standalone DPA, privacy date, terms date or sub-processor list was published.

In the vendor's words

“Customer content never trains shared models. Stored in the region your deployment requires.”
Lexlegis.ai homepage (Enterprise-grade security)
“SaaS, VPC on a sovereign cloud or your own, on-premises, or air-gapped.”
Lexlegis.ai homepage
“Four plans from ₹9,000$95 per user per month... Annual billing saves 20 percent.”
Lexlegis.ai homepage
“ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2, GDPR, CCPA and DPDP.”
Lexlegis.ai homepage

Not disclosed on public pages

"Not disclosed" records that no public statement was found where we looked, on the date shown. It does not assert that the control, term or figure is absent.

Not published on the pages we read on 2026-10-07: a privacy-policy date, a public standalone DPA, a terms date, a sub-processor list, and the provider names behind the fine-tuned open-source foundation models. A procurement file or DPIA normally records these details to verify processor identity, client-confidentiality boundaries, GDPR/DPDP Art. 28-equivalent obligations, and supervision of benchmark-backed accuracy statements.

Questions to put to the vendor

  1. Which open-source foundation models are fine-tuned for MIRA, and who hosts each model in SaaS mode?
  2. For regional deployment in India, EU, US, APAC and UK, which sub-processors process client data?
  3. Can you provide the standalone DPA referenced for customer-data fine-tuning?
  4. What evidence closed the SOC 2 Type II audit window, if the Q3 2026 report has issued?
  5. What benchmark sets and hallucination metrics support the researches without hallucination statement?

Accuracy evidence

No published accuracy or hallucination evaluation found as of 2026-10-07.

Related incidents

No incidents are recorded for this tool as of 2026-10-07.

Ownership · ~$7.2M raised over three rounds; Series A Sept 2024 (Tracxn). As of Oct 2026 the Trust Center publishes ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 as achieved (SOC 2 was previously 'audit in progress').

Sources

Report an issue with this record →

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Legal Tech Tools, "Lexlegis.ai (MIRA / On-Desk)", safelegalai.com/tools/lexlegis-ai (last checked 2026-10-07, accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

What the vendor has announced, dated

  1. Lexlegis.ai publishes note on Supreme Court draft AI regulations · Other

First-party statements from the vendor's own pages, as dated; "announced" is not "in use today". This month across all vendors · release timeline.

Documented facts, side by side

Facts from both vendors' pages in one table; never a ranking. All comparisons.

Also in Legal research

SafeLegalAI is a research publication, not a law firm. Nothing here is legal advice, and no lawyer–client relationship arises from reading it. Rules change; always check the official document linked on each record and take advice on your own situation. Researched and drafted with AI assistance; verified against primary sources and edited by SafeLegalAI. The linked official documents are the record — our summaries are not the law and are not legal advice.

Vendor, product, court and regulator names and logos are the property of their respective owners and are used solely to identify the product, body or document referred to; SafeLegalAI claims no rights in them. SafeLegalAI is not affiliated with, endorsed by, sponsored by or approved by any listed vendor, except where a record is labelled an affiliated product. Facts are recorded from vendors' published pages on the date shown; "not disclosed" means not found on the pages read, not that the vendor lacks it. No ranking, rating, review, recommendation or warranty is implied. Mark owners who prefer a text-only reference, and vendors seeking a correction, may write to the report page. Trade mark and quotation policy.