| Niyamam AI

Displaying 2661 - 2665 of 21904

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Aswathy Raj. S. et al vs Soudhamini et al regarding temporary injunction

Civil Suit

O. S. No. 392/2025

Thiruvananthapuram District

2025-12-01

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Seena vs Shamnad et al regarding getting a temporary injunction.

Civil Suit

O. S. No. 257/ 2025

Varkala, Thiruvananthapuram District

2025-12-01

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between S. Jessi vs Abdul Siyad regarding temporary injunction against encroachment.

Civil Suit

O. S. No. 343/ 2025

Varkala

2025-12-01

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Nujumudheen vs Sharafudheen regarding temporary injunction

Civil Suit

O. S. No. 16/2025

Thiruvananthapuram District

2025-12-03

approximately-1 year 20 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Muhammed Fari vs Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee et al regarding temporary injunction

Civil Suit

OS 387/2025

Varkala

2025-12-03

Defendant

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

30%

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 required court fees, leading to case dismissals for default.

Found in 30 cases (30%) High Impact

Lack of Evidence Provided

Many plaintiffs could not present sufficient evidence supporting their claims or the financial status of defendants.

Found in 25 cases (25%) High Impact

Failure to Take Steps

A significant number of cases were dismissed due to plaintiffs not taking necessary procedural steps.

Found in 20 cases (20%) Medium Impact

Absence of Petitioner in Court

Plaintiffs often did not appear in court, resulting in dismissals for lack of representation.

Found in 15 cases (15%) 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

Non-Payment of Batta

Lack of Evidence Provided

Failure to Take Steps

Absence of Petitioner in Court

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?