| Niyamam AI

Displaying 631 - 635 of 21877

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Chandramohandas et al vs Sani regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Civil Suit

O S 137/2022

Vaikom Taluk

2025-11-29

approximately-3 years 5 months

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between K.J.John vs Sathyan et al regarding mediation settlement

Civil Suit

O S. 153/2024

Vaikom

2025-11-29

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Union Bank of India vs Boby Abraham et al regarding realisation of money

Civil Suit

O S 236/2022

Vaikom, Kottayam District

2025-11-29

approximately-2 years 11 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Scaria Thomas vs Rajeev M.S. et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Civil Suit

OS 13/2025

Vaikom, Kerala

2025-11-29

approximately-2 years 10 months

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Shaji vs Thankappan, Chellamma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction

Civil Suit

O S. 41/2017

Vaikom Taluk, Kerala

2025-11-29

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

9639

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

28%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Default Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Plaintiffs frequently failed to pay required court fees, leading to case dismissal for default.

Found in 28 cases (28%) Medium Impact

Absence of Evidence Presented

Many cases were dismissed due to plaintiffs not providing sufficient evidence to support their claims.

Found in 24 cases (24%) Medium Impact

Failure to Take Required Steps

Plaintiffs often neglected to take necessary procedural steps, such as issuing notices, causing case failures.

Found in 20 cases (20%) Medium Impact

Lack of Representation in Court

Cases were often dismissed due to plaintiffs not appearing or being represented in court sessions.

Found in 19 cases (19%) 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 Presented

Failure to Take Required Steps

Lack of Representation in Court

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?