| Niyamam AI

Displaying 576 - 580 of 21817

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Navilal vs Sivankutty regarding Declaration and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction.

Civil Suit

OS. No. 523/2023

Kollam

2025-01-29

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between The South Indian Bank Limited vs Mohammed Najeeb P.A et al regarding Realisation of Money

Civil Suit

OS. No. 553/2018

Kollam

2025-01-29

approximately-8 years 5 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ramla Beevi vs Sulfikkar regarding realisation of money

Civil Suit

OS. 877/2024

Kollam

2025-01-29

approximately-3 years 8 months

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Thankam et al vs Anila et al regarding Injunction

Injunction

OS. No.787/2023

Kollam

2025-01-31

approximately-1 year 4 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between V.M.Jayaprakasan et al vs Ushakumary et al regarding injunction

Civil Suit

OS. No. 676/2018

Kollam

2025-01-31

approximately-6 years 6 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

9608

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

36%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Non-Payment of Batta

Plaintiffs frequently failed to pay the necessary batta, leading to case dismissal for default.

Found in 36 cases (36%) High Impact

Absence of the Petitioner

Many petitions were dismissed due to the petitioner's failure to appear in court during proceedings.

Found in 27 cases (27%) Medium Impact

Lack of Evidence

Dismissing cases due to insufficient evidence to support claims was common among the plaintiffs.

Found in 20 cases (20%) Medium Impact

No Steps Taken

Frequent dismissal occurred because plaintiffs did not take necessary procedural steps, like issuing notices.

Found in 13 cases (13%) 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

Non-Payment of Batta

Absence of the Petitioner

Lack of Evidence

No Steps Taken

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?