| Niyamam AI

Displaying 17651 - 17655 of 22092

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Dr.A.A.Abdul Majeed vs Mr.P.N.Radhakrishnan regarding settlement in mediation

Civil Suit

O.S. No. 1327/2022

Ernakulam

2025-01-29

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ansari Abdul Kareem vs Greater Cochin Development Authority regarding condonation of delay

Civil Suit

O.S. No.1337/2018

Ernakulam

2025-01-29

approximately-2 years 11 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ansari Abdul Kareem vs Greater Cochin Development Authority regarding restoration of suit

Restoration Petition

O.S.No.1337/2018

Ernakulam

2025-01-29

approximately-2 years 11 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between P.C. Abdul Nissar vs Malik et al regarding settlement of disputes

O.S. No. 1305/2024

Ernakulam

2025-01-30

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between M/s. PARKA International vs Renjith et al regarding a civil suit.

Civil Suit

O.S. No. 889/2023

Ernakulam

2025-01-30

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

9740

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

23%

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 failed to pay the required batta, leading to dismissals for default in multiple cases.

Found in 23 cases (23%) High Impact

Absence of Plaintiff in Court

Petitions were dismissed due to the plaintiffs' absence during hearings, affecting their cases significantly.

Found in 19 cases (19%) Medium Impact

Lack of Evidence Provided

Failure to present sufficient evidence regarding financial means of respondents resulted in dismissals.

Found in 18 cases (18%) Medium Impact

Failure to Issue Necessary Notices

Plaintiffs neglected to take steps to issue required notices to respondents, leading to case dismissals.

Found in 12 cases (12%) 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 Due to Non-Payment of Batta

Absence of Plaintiff in Court

Lack of Evidence Provided

Failure to Issue Necessary Notices

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?