| Niyamam AI

Displaying 456 - 460 of 21871

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Jithkumar.B vs Thankappan.P et al regarding Injunction

Injunction

OS. No. 79/2024

Kollam District

2025-06-16

approximately-1 year 5 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Baburajan Pillai vs Radhakrishna Pillai regarding specific performance of a contract

Civil Suit

OS. No. 815/2019

Kollam

2025-06-16

approximately-5 years 11 months

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Sinil.J vs Valsala Reghukumar regarding realization of money

Civil Suit

OS. No. 960/2018

Kollam District

2025-06-16

approximately-7 years 2 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Reetha et al vs Edward et al regarding fixation, permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.

Civil Suit

OS. No. 242/2010

Kollam

2025-06-17

approximately-15 years

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Sindhu vs Vimala regarding U/s. 138 N.I. Act.

Criminal Case

S.T. No.140/2023

KOLLAM

2025-06-18

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

9635

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

35%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Dismissals for Non-Payment

Plaintiffs frequently failed due to non-payment of required fees and batta for proceedings.

Found in 35 cases (35%) High Impact

Absence of the Petitioner

Many cases were dismissed due to the absent petitioner, affecting the ability to proceed.

Found in 20 cases (20%) Medium Impact

Lack of Evidence Provided

Failure to present adequate evidence supporting claims led to case dismissals.

Found in 25 cases (25%) Medium Impact

Failure to Issue Necessary Notices

Inadequate steps taken to issue required notices to respondents resulted in dismissals.

Found in 15 cases (15%) 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

Default Dismissals for Non-Payment

Absence of the Petitioner

Lack of Evidence Provided

Failure to Issue Necessary Notices

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?