| Niyamam AI

Displaying 2766 - 2770 of 21904

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Sajitha. M. vs Sasi et al regarding temporary injunction.

Civil Suit

O.S. 483/ 2024

Varkala

2025-03-12

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Sunil Kumar Narayanan et al vs State of Kerala et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Civil Suit

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 224/2022

Thiruvananthapuram

2025-03-18

approximately-3 years

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Ambika S.V. et al vs NIL regarding issuance of a succession certificate.

Succession

O.P. SUCCESSION NO. 05/2024

Thiruvananthapuram District

2025-03-18

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Anilkumar vs Bindhu regarding execution petition

Execution Petition

OS No. 403/2019

2025-03-24

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between A.K. Naseer vs Jamal Sha regarding declaration of title and injunction

Civil Suit

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 257/ 2020

Varkala

2025-03-26

approximately-4 years 9 months

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

9650

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

32%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Plaintiffs frequently failed to pay necessary fees, leading to dismissal of petitions for default.

Found in 32 cases (32%) High Impact

Lack of Evidence Presented

Petitioners often lacked essential evidence to support their claims, resulting in case dismissals.

Found in 25 cases (25%) High Impact

Default Due to Absence of Petitioner

Many cases were dismissed because the petitioners failed to appear in court.

Found in 19 cases (19%) Medium Impact

Failure to Take Required Steps

Petitioners repeatedly failed to take necessary procedural steps, leading to case defaults.

Found in 14 cases (14%) Medium 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

Lack of Evidence Presented

Default Due to Absence of Petitioner

Failure to Take Required Steps

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?