How litigators use Justis AI

The problem

A brief arrives the evening before the hearing: a petition, three replies and forty annexures, half of them scanned orders in mixed Hindi and English. Building the list of dates takes a junior two days, and the date that decides the matter is on page 412 of an annexure nobody opened.

A chronology typed from memory on the way to court is also where mistakes live. Two documents give different dates for the same service, an interim order is referred to but never placed on record, and nobody notices until the other side does.

How Justis handles it

Upload the paper book to a project. Justis reads every document, runs OCR on the scans and tells you when it is reading one, then builds a dated chronology in which every entry cites the document and page it came from.

It marks what does not reconcile: dates two documents give differently, orders referred to but not on file, and gaps in the sequence. It flags anything that raises a limitation question, and hands back the list of dates in Word, ready for the synopsis.

The problem

Limitation is argued at admission, and it is unforgiving. The period depends on the statute: ninety days for a first appeal to the High Court, sixty for a commercial appeal, three months and thirty days under section 34 of the Arbitration Act with nothing after that. Then come the exclusions: the time taken to obtain a certified copy, the day the court was closed, the time spent before the wrong forum.

Getting the arithmetic wrong by a day costs the matter, and condonation of delay is increasingly hard to get, especially in commercial matters and for government departments.

How Justis handles it

Justis identifies the provision that governs, reads the dates off the documents (the order, the application for the certified copy, the date it was ready) and computes the last date with every exclusion shown line by line, so you can check the working rather than trust a number.

It says whether section 5 condonation is available for that proceeding, drafts the delay paragraph or the condonation application when you are already late, and can keep a deadline register for the whole matter list.

The problem

The written statement is due thirty days from service, and in a commercial suit the outer limit of 120 days cannot be extended at all. Every averment must be admitted or specifically denied: a general denial is treated as an admission under Order VIII rule 5.

The preliminary objections that win suits early, such as territorial jurisdiction, limitation, valuation, or no pre-institution mediation under section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, are easy to miss when the reply is written against the clock.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the plaint, its documents and your client's instructions, then builds a paragraph-wise table: admit, deny or not within knowledge, with the document that supports each position. It checks the preliminary objections one by one and says which the record supports.

It drafts the written statement in your chambers' style, with the verification and the supporting affidavit, and computes both the thirty-day date and the outer limit from the date of service.

The problem

A search returns four hundred judgments. What you need is the one that binds your bench: the larger bench, the most recent word, not overruled or referred, and the exact paragraph that holds the point. Reading headnotes to find it takes an afternoon.

Citing a judgment that has since been overruled, or quoting a paragraph that does not say what the note claims, is the mistake that costs credibility in court.

How Justis handles it

Justis searches over 16 million Supreme Court and High Court judgments, reads the candidates and ranks them by what binds: Supreme Court decisions under Article 141, then larger benches, then your High Court. It looks for later treatment of each authority before relying on it.

It quotes the operative paragraph with a link to the judgment, and every quotation is checked against the source text before it is shown. If the words cannot be found, the citation is flagged instead of presented as checked. The research memo ends with a table of authorities and their weight.

The problem

Bail work is urgent and the papers are poor: an FIR photographed on a phone, remand orders in Hindi, a chargesheet that may or may not have been filed. The sections have changed since 1 July 2024, and an offence committed before that date is still tried under the old codes.

The strongest ground is often arithmetic, such as the day the right to default bail accrued, and it is lost if nobody counts the days.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the FIR, the remand orders and the chargesheet, including scans, and classifies each offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the First Schedule of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita: cognizable or not, bailable or not, the court that tries it.

It counts the custody period for default bail under section 187(3) BNSS, grades each ground Strong, Weak or Uncertain with the fact behind it, and drafts the application in Indian form, with the list of dates and the authorities.

The problem

Most writ petitions are lost on maintainability, not merits: there is an alternative remedy, the delay is unexplained, or the facts are disputed. The petition has to meet each objection before the bench raises it.

The paper book also has a fixed shape (synopsis, list of dates, memo of parties, grounds, prayer, affidavit, index), and assembling it by hand is where filing defects come from.

How Justis handles it

Justis grades each maintainability gate for your facts, including the exceptions that let a writ lie despite an alternative remedy: breach of natural justice, an order without jurisdiction, and enforcement of a fundamental right. It builds the grounds, strongest first, each tied to a page of the record.

It drafts the petition with the interim application and the affidavit, in the form your High Court expects, and says plainly when two gates look weak so you can decide before drafting.

The problem

The witness's affidavit in chief says one thing, the documents say another, and the earlier statement says a third. The contradictions that would win the cross are spread across hundreds of pages, and there is one evening to find them.

A cross built from memory asks open questions and gives the witness room. The one that works asks closed questions, one fact at a time, with the contradicting document in hand.

How Justis handles it

Justis puts each witness in a column and every disputed fact in a row, so a contradiction is something you see, with the page on each side. It builds the cross in chapters: closed, leading questions in sequence, and the prior statement or document to confront the witness with under section 148 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.

It also lists the questions not to ask, where the answer could hurt your client.

The problem

Benches increasingly ask for short written submissions, and a record of four hundred pages and twenty authorities has to become a few tight pages the night before. Every proposition needs its authority and its page of the record, and every quotation has to be exact.

The note of arguments you speak from is a different document again, and it is usually written last and fastest.

How Justis handles it

Justis turns the issues into propositions, each with the authority that supports it and the record page it rests on, and drafts the submissions around them. It answers the other side's best point instead of ignoring it.

It prepares a one-page note of arguments and a table of authorities, checks every quotation against the judgment it came from, and keeps the draft in your chambers' style.

The problem

The order arrives and the clock starts. The client wants to know, that day, whether to appeal, how long they have, whether the decree can be stayed, and at what cost. If you won, the question is how quickly the decree can be executed.

The grounds of appeal have to come from the judgment itself: the finding, the evidence it ignored and the law it misapplied, paragraph by paragraph.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the judgment against the record, maps each finding to the evidence it rests on, and identifies the errors that make good grounds. It names the forum and the period, computes the last date, and sets out what a stay will usually cost, such as a deposit or security.

If the decree is in your favour, it drafts the execution plan instead: the court, the mode of execution and the assets to proceed against.