| Niyamam AI

Displaying 3481 - 3485 of 22144

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between T.K. Sathyababu vs Sarada Wilson et al regarding IA No. 4576/2016

Civil Suit

OS. No.1188/2014

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-06-28

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Canara Bank vs M/s Jerald Metals regarding realisation of money.

Civil Suit

OS. No.1228/2024

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-04-03

approximately-3 years 3 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Preethi Paul vs Dr.Sheela.K.Pillai regarding injunction

Injunction

OS.No.645/2025

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2025-04-03

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Murukesh.M vs Sandeep.G.P regarding conditional attachment of property

Civil Suit

OS. No.651/2025

Thiruvananthapuram

2025-04-03

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Vijayakumar vs Vineeth kumar regarding declaration, Recovery of Possession and injunction reliefs.

Civil Suit

O.S. No.949/2018

Thiruvananthapuram

2025-04-04

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

9766

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

20%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Many petitions were dismissed for lack of payment for necessary fees required for the proceedings.

Found in 20 cases (20%) High Impact

Absence of Evidence Provided

Petitions were often dismissed due to the lack of sufficient evidence demonstrating financial means or supporting claims.

Found in 18 cases (18%) High Impact

Failure to Take Required Steps

Numerous cases were dismissed because plaintiffs failed to take necessary procedural steps, leading to defaults.

Found in 17 cases (17%) Medium Impact

Absence of the Petitioner

Cases were dismissed if the petitioner failed to appear in court, resulting in a 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

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Absence of Evidence Provided

Failure to Take Required Steps

Absence of the Petitioner

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?