Kamla Lal Hiranand

Kamla Lal Hiranand is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 7 counsels. Through 3 law firms. Their track record shows a 25.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

Kamla Lal Hiranand has been represented by 3 law firms and 7 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Ramdas & Wong	1 case	Michael Hwang Roslina Bte Baba Constance Tay Roslina Baba
Michael Hwang	1 case	Michael Hwang
Tan Rajah & Cheah	1 case	SH Almenoar Elaine Seow Syed Almenoar

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Kamla Lal Hiranand's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.5
Complex Cases: 0 (0.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	32.7 parties avg	2.7	75.0%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	25.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2000	23.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Kamla Lal Hiranand's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(75.0%)	75.0%
Won	1(25.0%)	25.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	10,000.00	5,000.002 cases	2
USD	2,000,000.00	2,000,000.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2000	1 2	Lost: 2 cases (200.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2007-sgca-5 28 Jan 2007	28 Jan 2007	Respondent	LostAppeal dismissed, with costs to the appellant. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	2006-sghc-98 05 Jun 2006	05 Jun 2006	Defendant	WonDefendant's counterclaim for a declaration that the 1999 deed was valid and binding on the plaintiff and for specific performance thereof was allowed. The court also allowed her counterclaim for all necessary accounts and inquiries to be taken of all the property and assets of MHR’s estate and that the plaintiff pay her 25% of the assets of the said estate. Her final counterclaim for the payment to her of US$2m under cl 4 of the 1999 deed was also allowed although it should be subsumed under the prayer for specific performance, anyway. Assumed USD, as the judgment refers to amounts in USD.
3	2000-sgca-40 07 Aug 2000	07 Aug 2000	Appellant	LostAppeal dismissed; the appellant's claim that the estate of the deceased is subject to a trust as set out in the 1988 Will was rejected. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	2000-sghc-17 30 Jan 2000	30 Jan 2000	Plaintiff, Appellant	LostPlaintiff's appeal was dismissed, and she was ordered to pay the first and third defendants $10,000 in costs for the appeal. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.