| Niyamam AI

Displaying 3941 - 3945 of 15270

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Sanal et al vs Appu Nadar et al regarding dismissal for default

Civil Suit

OS.No.1830/2018

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-08-02

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Canara Bank vs Gopika.G.S et al regarding realisation of money

Civil Suit

OS. No.2066/2016

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-08-04

approximately-9 years 2 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Canara Bank vs T Minidas regarding dismissal for default

Civil Suit

OS.No.2079/2023

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-08-04

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Canara Bank vs Viji.S regarding Suit for realisation of money.

Civil Suit

OS.No.1180/2024

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-08-04

approximately-5 years 7 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Jithesh.S.V. vs Aditya Manjeet Raghavan regarding temporary prohibitory injunction

Civil Suit

OS.No.864/2025

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-11-13

approximately-6 months

Defendant

View Full Details

Historical Outcome Trends

Based on analysis of similar cases in Kerala Munsif Courts

Disclaimer: This is informational analysis based on historical data, not legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified lawyer for personalized guidance.

51%

Success Rate for Plaintiff

Based on 15,270 similar cases

Key Insights

Documentary Evidence Strength High Impact

Average Case Duration 3.3 years

Settlement Likelihood 12%

Common Winning Factors:

Commission Report (in 807 cases)
Lawyer Notice (in 682 cases)
Sale deed (in 574 cases)
Postal receipt (in 543 cases)
Tax receipt (in 530 cases)

Plaintiff Won: 7721
Defendant Won: 6453

6453

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

34%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Due to Non-Payment

Plaintiffs frequently failed to pay necessary fees or batta, resulting in case dismissals.

Found in 34 cases (34%) High Impact

Lack of Evidence Presented

Insufficient evidence to demonstrate the respondents' means to pay the decree led to dismissals.

Found in 26 cases (26%) Medium Impact

Failure to Take Necessary Steps

Plaintiffs often did not take required procedural steps, such as issuing notices or representation.

Found in 24 cases (24%) Medium Impact

Absence of Petitioners

Many cases were dismissed due to the petitioners' absence during hearings, leaving cases unresolved.

Found in 16 cases (16%) 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

Lack of Evidence Presented

Failure to Take Necessary Steps

Absence of Petitioners

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?