Digital Assets And Proprietary Rights: A Cross- Border Study Of Cryptocurrency As Property In Comparative Jurisprudence
- IJLLR Journal
- Mar 2
- 2 min read
Pranav M. Khatavkar, Founder, Lexentra
ABSTRACT
This research paper examines the decision of the Madras High Court in Rhutikumari v. Zanmai Labs Pvt. Ltd. within the broader evolution of private law treatment of cryptocurrency in cross-border disputes. The judgment addresses the availability of interim relief in India in support of foreign-seated arbitration, the characterization of cryptoassets as property capable of proprietary protection, and the interaction between domestic judicial remedies and foreign restructuring processes affecting platform users. Through comparative analysis, this research paper situates the decision alongside jurisprudence from England, Singapore, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and the United States, highlighting developments in the treatment of crypto custody, proprietary interests, and insolvency outcomes.
The reasoning reflected in the judgment aligns with a wider common law movement recognizing digital tokens as intangible property, while also illustrating the continuing importance of contractual structure in determining whether exchange relationships are characterized as custodial or debtor-creditor in nature. Comparative authorities and regulatory developments demonstrate that the resolution of digital asset disputes frequently turns on platform documentation, segregation practices, and cross-border corporate arrangements. The Court’s direction requiring security-based interim relief, rather than preservation of the specific digital asset, reflects a judicial approach calibrated to jurisdictional considerations and technical custody complexities arising in transnational settings.
This research paper also reviews legislative and regulatory developments across multiple jurisdictions, including European Union market regulation, Singaporean custody safeguards, United States commercial law reforms, and emerging Indian compliance frameworks. The decision is examined within the context of evolving proprietary doctrines, arbitration practice, and cross-border insolvency coordination. The analysis highlights the significance of contractual allocation of custody, control, and intra-group authority in determining legal outcomes in disputes involving cryptocurrency platforms, while situating the judgment within ongoing global developments concerning digital asset governance and proprietary rights.
