| Niyamam AI- Beta

Displaying 156 - 160 of 342

District

Court Establishment

Public case category

Case Summary

Case between Suhara vs Muhammed Salam et al regarding partition and consequential injunction.

Civil Suit

O. S. No.139/2019

Perumbavoor

2025-11-29

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Shajeena Shameem vs Subaida regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction.

Civil Suit

O. S. No.224/2018

PERUMBAVOOR

2025-11-29

Defendant

View Full Details

Case between Venugopal vs Chandran et al regarding specific performance of a contract for sale of immovable property

Civil Suit

O. S. No.136/2024

Perumbavoor

2025-10-10

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Devaki et al vs Chandran et al regarding partition and injunction.

Civil Suit

O. S. No.06/2018

Perumbavoor

2025-10-10

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Case between Kusumavally vs State of Kerala et al regarding Mandatory injunction

Civil Suit

O. S. No.272/2019

Perumbavoor

2025-10-15

Plaintiff

View Full Details

Historical Outcome Trends

Based on analysis of similar cases in Kerala Munsif Courts

Disclaimer: This is informational analysis based on historical data, not legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified lawyer for personalized guidance.

68%

Success Rate for Plaintiff

Based on 342 similar cases

Key Insights

Documentary Evidence Strength High Impact

Average Case Duration 5.1 years

Settlement Likelihood 5%

Common Winning Factors:

Sale deed (in 136 cases)
Commission Report (in 109 cases)
Tax receipt (in 63 cases)
Partition Deed (in 48 cases)
Death Certificate (in 36 cases)

Plaintiff Won: 233
Defendant Won: 92

Cases Failed

Primary Reasons

18.5%

Top Reason Occurrence

Common Failure Reasons

Learn why cases like yours failed so you can avoid mistakes

Plaintiff Absence in Court

Multiple suits were dismissed due to the plaintiffs' failure to appear or represent their cases effectively.

Found in 17 cases (18.5%) Medium Impact

Insufficient Evidence Provided

Plaintiffs frequently failed to provide adequate evidence to support their claims or ownership of the property.

Found in 26 cases (28.3%) High Impact

Failure to Prove Ownership

Many cases were dismissed because plaintiffs could not establish ownership of disputed property, crucial for their claims.

Found in 22 cases (23.9%) High Impact

Procedural Deficiencies Noted

Plaintiffs often did not follow necessary legal procedures, leading to dismissals based on jurisdiction or lack of parties.

Found in 17 cases (18.5%) 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

Plaintiff Absence in Court

Insufficient Evidence Provided

Failure to Prove Ownership

Procedural Deficiencies Noted

How to Strengthen Your Case

Need More Details?