| Niyamam AI

Displaying 1651 - 1655 of 21903

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

Parties/Entities involved(eg: Bank, Panchayath, temple, Mosque etc.)

Case between Korothkandiyil Afnitha @ Hasniba vs Korothkandiyil Mami et al regarding partition and separate possession

Civil Suit

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 172/2023

Nadapuram, Kerala

2025-03-10

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Nikhil vs Shamsu regarding dishonor of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Criminal Case

S.T. No. 6/2023

Nadapuram

2025-03-12

approximately-3 years 8 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Saleena vs Ajeendran Alakandi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Civil Suit

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 113/2024

NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE

2025-03-13

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ammad. K @ Ammad Haji vs Shyni et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Civil Suit

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 10/2025

Nadapuram, Kozhikode, Kerala

2025-03-14

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between JD1 vs DH regarding decree debt

Execution Petition

EP 99/2024

NADAPURAM

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Historical Outcome Trends

Based on analysis of similar cases in Kerala Munsif Courts

AI & Machine Learning Estimate

These figures are produced by statistical and machine-learning analysis of past court judgments. They are not legal advice and not a prediction about your own case. Every case turns on its own facts — please consult a qualified lawyer before making any decision.

49%

Success Rate for Plaintiff

Based on 21,803 similar cases

Key Insights

Documentary Evidence Strength High Impact

Average Case Duration 3.7 years

Settlement Likelihood 12%

Common Winning Factors:

Commission Report (in 1214 cases)
Sale deed (in 964 cases)
Postal receipt (in 953 cases)
Tax receipt (in 826 cases)
Lawyer Notice (in 804 cases)

Plaintiff Won: 10751
Defendant Won: 9603

9649

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

30%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Numerous petitions were dismissed for default primarily because plaintiffs failed to pay necessary fees for processing their cases.

Found in 30 cases (30%) High Impact

Absence of the Petitioner

Many cases were dismissed due to the petitioner's absence during court proceedings, resulting in default judgments.

Found in 25 cases (25%) Medium Impact

Lack of Evidence Presented

In numerous cases, plaintiffs failed to provide necessary evidence to support their claims, leading to case dismissals.

Found in 20 cases (20%) Medium Impact

Failure to Issue Notices

Several petitions were dismissed due to the plaintiffs' failure to issue required notices to the defendants as mandated.

Found in 15 cases (15%) Low Impact

How to Strengthen Your Case

Gather all documentary evidence (title deeds, receipts, contracts) before filing
Ensure filing is within limitation period - consult lawyer about deadlines
Prepare witnesses thoroughly and ensure their statements are consistent
Maintain complete chain of ownership documents with no gaps
Follow all procedural requirements and court timelines strictly

Need More Details?

View complete analysis of failed cases in your category

Kerala Civil Court Judgments Database

Public User

Legal Professional

similar cases search

Historical Outcome Trends

Key Insights

Common Winning Factors:

Common Failure Reasons

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Absence of the Petitioner

Lack of Evidence Presented

Failure to Issue Notices

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?