| Niyamam AI

Displaying 3726 - 3730 of 21904

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

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

Case between Fortune Chits and Investments vs P.U.Scaria regarding realization of money.

Civil Suit

OS No. 56/2020

Kolenchery

2024-06-29

approximately-3 years 26 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between PEPCO vs P. P Corporation regarding realization of money

Civil Suit

os. No.20/2018

Kolenchery

2024-03-01

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Beny Joy vs The Head Load and General Workers Union (CITU) et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and ancillary reliefs

Civil Suit

OS No. 10 / 2024

2024-06-29

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ammini et al vs Ajitha Sunil et al regarding partition

Civil Suit

OS No. 10/2021

Kolenchery, Ernakulam

2024-05-31

approximately-3 years 21 days

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Ramdas vs Surendran et al regarding mandatory injunction for correction of sale deed.

Civil Suit

OS No. 39 / 2021

2024-05-24

Plaintiff

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

25%

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 necessary fees, leading to case dismissals.

Found in 25 cases (25%) Medium Impact

Absence of the Petitioner

Dismissals occurred when petitioners failed to appear in court when required.

Found in 22 cases (22%) Medium Impact

Lack of Evidence Presented

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

Found in 20 cases (20%) High Impact

Failure to Issue Required Notices

Plaintiffs often failed to issue necessary notices to defendants, leading to case dismissals.

Found in 17 cases (17%) 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 the Petitioner

Lack of Evidence Presented

Failure to Issue Required Notices

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?