Best Litigation Screening Software for Banks and NBFCs in India (2026)
What litigation screening actually means for a bank or NBFC, why it is harder than a simple name search, and how the main options in India compare in 2026.
Buyer’s Guide · BFSI Litigation Screening
Every loan a bank or NBFC approves carries a hidden risk: the borrower or guarantor may already be fighting, or losing, a court case that never showed up in a credit bureau report. Litigation screening is the check that catches this before disbursal, not after. This guide looks at what makes litigation screening genuinely hard for Indian lenders, what a good screening tool needs to get right, and how the main options compare in 2026.
- Best combined screening and tracking: Claw, all-India AI case search with name-tolerant matching, plus case tracking across 8200+ courts once litigation is found.
- Best for high-volume automated screening: Perfios (Litigation BI) and LegitQuest (LIBIL), both purpose-built, API-first BFSI screening products.
- Not screening tools: Provakil and Legistify are strong for managing recovery litigation and notices after a loan is already in default, a different job from pre-lending screening.
- Pricing: mostly quote-based across the category; Claw is the one priced per seat, around Rs 9,000 to 13,000 per year. Claw also has a free plan for individual advocates, with paid plans for teams and enterprises.
01Why litigation screening is hard for banks and NBFCs
Litigation screening, in the BFSI sense, means checking whether a borrower, guarantor, co-applicant, or corporate counterparty has an existing or past court case that changes how risky the loan is. It is a specific, narrower job than general case search or case tracking. See what litigation screening means for a fuller definition. In practice, it is hard for three reasons.
A credit bureau report does not show litigation
CIBIL and other bureau scores tell a lender about repayment history on reported credit lines. They do not tell a lender that an applicant is a defendant in a cheque-bounce case, a party to a SARFAESI action from another lender, or facing a consumer or civil dispute that could affect their ability to repay or their intent to. That information sits in court records, not credit records, and the two systems do not talk to each other.
India’s courts are fragmented and names are unreliable
There is no single national database of pending cases. Records sit across the Supreme Court, 25 High Courts, thousands of district courts, and specialised forums such as DRTs, consumer forums, and RERA authorities, each with its own portal and format. On top of that, Indian names are genuinely hard to match: the same person may appear as “Mohd” or “Mohammed”, with or without a middle name, transliterated differently across languages, or simply misspelled at intake. A screening tool that matches only on exact name spelling will miss real hits and flag the wrong people. This is part of what the industry calls litigation intelligence, turning scattered, messy court data into a usable risk signal.
Volume and turnaround time are unforgiving
A retail NBFC processing thousands of loan applications a month cannot wait days for a manual court search on each one, and a bank cannot afford a false negative on a large corporate exposure. Screening has to be fast enough to fit inside a loan approval workflow, and accurate enough that compliance and risk teams can rely on it, without drowning underwriters in false positives from common names.
A different job: screening vs collections
Litigation screening happens before disbursal, to decide whether to lend. Once a loan is already in default, tracking notices, SARFAESI proceedings, and recovery suits is a separate job, usually called legal collections or litigation management. Some vendors in this guide do that job well; we say so where it applies, rather than reviewing them as screening tools they are not.
02What good litigation screening software looks like
For a bank or NBFC, five things separate a screening tool that actually reduces risk from one that just adds a report to the file.
- Court and tribunal coverage: how many courts, tribunals, and specialised forums (DRT, consumer forums, RERA, and similar) the tool actually searches, not just the higher courts.
- Name and entity matching: whether the tool tolerates spelling variants, aliases, and transliteration, and can match on PAN, CIN, or other identifiers, not just a literal name string.
- Turnaround time: whether a check fits inside a loan approval SLA, from instant automated results to a slower, more detailed manual report where the exposure justifies it.
- Risk signal, not just a list: whether the tool helps a risk or compliance team interpret the hits (case type, stage, forum), rather than handing back a raw dump of matches to sort through.
- Fit with what happens next: if a check does turn up litigation, whether the same platform can also track that case going forward, or whether the finding has to be handed off to a separate tracking process.
The hardest part of litigation screening is not finding a court record. It is matching it to the right person, fast enough to fit inside a loan decision.
03The best litigation screening tools for banks and NBFCs (2026)
The tools below are evaluated for the screening job specifically: checking a borrower or counterparty for litigation before a lending decision. Two entries are purpose-built BFSI screening products; two others are strong at the adjacent job of managing litigation and collections once a case exists, and we say so plainly rather than reviewing them as something they are not.
Top pick
Claw
All-India AI case search with name-tolerant matching and court-ready citations, paired with case tracking once litigation is found.
Strengths
- Searches an all-India database of 1.5 billion+ records and 30 crore+ judgements, covering 25 High Courts (1980 to 2026) and the Supreme Court (1950 to 2026).
- Name-tolerant, proximity and phonetic search, built to handle spelling variants and transliteration, a real problem when screening Indian names at scale.
- Results in under 5 seconds, with verified, court-ready citations rather than a raw, unverified match list.
- If a check finds litigation, the same platform can then track that matter across 8200+ courts and tribunals, with auto case updates, cause lists, and alerts, instead of handing the finding off to a spreadsheet.
- Priced per seat rather than per bulk API call, which suits an in-house legal, risk, or compliance team doing screening and monitoring together, more than a fully automated, high-volume onboarding pipeline.
Keep in mind
- Claw is built as an all-in-one legal platform for search, tracking, and compliance, not as a single-purpose bulk screening API with a formal borrower risk score. Teams that need to screen lakhs of applicants a month through an automated API should also evaluate the specialist screening products below.
Best for Bank and NBFC legal, risk, and compliance teams that want fast, name-tolerant litigation checks and want to keep tracking any case that turns up, in one platform.
Perfios (Litigation BI)
A purpose-built litigation search and risk-categorisation product from a large BFSI fintech data platform.
Strengths
- Searches 350 million+ court records across 3,500+ courts and tribunals, including the Supreme Court, High Courts, district courts, DRTs, RERA, consumer forums, revenue courts, and SEBI.
- AI-based risk categorisation on top of raw matches, aimed at credit underwriting rather than general legal research.
- Available as an API for direct integration into a lender’s onboarding or underwriting flow, or as downloadable PDF or Excel reports.
- Backed by a fintech data company already serving 900+ financial institutions, so it plugs into existing BFSI decisioning stacks.
Keep in mind
- Litigation BI is one module within a broader fintech data and decisioning suite, not a dedicated legal case-tracking or case-management platform.
- Pricing is not publicly listed; it is enterprise, quote-based, and typically volume-linked rather than per-seat.
Best for Larger banks and NBFCs that want an API-first, high-volume litigation check built into an automated underwriting pipeline.
LegitQuest (LIBIL)
A litigation-centric legal due diligence platform built specifically for lending, background checks, and M&A screening.
Strengths
- Searches 400 million+ court and tribunal records plus 4 million+ FIR records, combining civil and criminal exposure in one check.
- Search by name, father’s name, address, aliases, and entity identifiers, with a proprietary LIBIL score to help rank matches.
- Multiple report tiers: an instant report in 1 to 2 minutes, a detailed report with narrative in about 2 hours, and a manual, disclosure-grade report for IPO-level due diligence.
- Offered as both an API and a portal, so it can be self-served by a smaller team or integrated into a larger onboarding system.
Keep in mind
- As with most screening-only tools, ongoing tracking of a matter once it is found in the system is a separate step, not built into the same workflow.
- Pricing is not publicly listed and is quote-based.
Best for Lenders and background-check providers that want a dedicated litigation-and-FIR screening report with a built-in match score.
Provakil
A legal collections and litigation management platform for recovery, not a pre-lending screening tool.
Strengths
- Purpose-built workflows for SARFAESI, arbitration, Section 138 cheque-bounce proceedings, and vehicle repossession, used by major banks and NBFCs.
- Automated notice generation and delivery tracking across SMS, email, WhatsApp, and India Post.
- Case alerts pulled from 19,000+ forums, with stage-wise tracking once a recovery matter is filed.
Keep in mind
- This is a post-disbursal recovery and collections tool, not a pre-lending litigation screening product. It manages litigation after it exists, rather than checking for it before a loan is approved.
Best for Banks and NBFCs managing an existing book of defaults and recovery litigation, once screening has already happened.
Legistify
End-to-end legal management with strong BFSI notice and litigation-management modules, again focused on the post-lending side.
Strengths
- Notice management built for BFSI, including bulk Section 138 notice generation from loan account data and RBI-inspection-ready audit trails.
- Litigation management with case tracking and alerts across Indian courts, alongside contract and IP modules for broader legal teams.
Keep in mind
- Like Provakil, its core strength for BFSI is managing notices and recovery litigation, not screening applicants before disbursal.
- Pricing is not publicly listed.
Best for In-house legal teams that want one platform for contracts, notices, and litigation across a lending business.
04Side-by-side comparison
| Tool | Primary job | Coverage | Name/entity matching | Pricing model | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claw | Litigation search + ongoing tracking | 1.5B+ records, 25 High Courts + Supreme Court for search; 8200+ courts for tracking | Name-tolerant, proximity and phonetic | Per seat, roughly Rs 9k to 13k/yr | Search plus keep tracking any hit |
| Perfios (Litigation BI) | Pre-lending screening | 350M+ records, 3500+ courts and tribunals | AI risk categorisation on matches | Enterprise, quote-based | High-volume API screening |
| LegitQuest (LIBIL) | Pre-lending screening | 400M+ records + 4M+ FIR records | Name, alias, entity ID, LIBIL score | Quote-based | Litigation + FIR screening with a score |
| Provakil | Post-lending recovery | 19,000+ forums (case alerts) | Not a screening product | Quote-based | Managing existing recovery litigation |
| Legistify | Post-lending recovery | Courts across India (tracking) | Not a screening product | Quote-based | Notices and litigation for an in-house team |
05What it costs
Pricing in this category is mostly not public, and that itself is a useful fact for a buyer: expect to request a quote rather than find a price list.
- Perfios and LegitQuest price on a quote basis, typically linked to check volume, since both are built for high-volume, API-driven screening rather than a fixed number of user seats.
- Provakil and Legistify also price on a quote basis, reflecting the size of the recovery or notice-management workload rather than a simple per-seat rate.
- Claw is priced per seat, around Rs 9,000 to 13,000 per seat per year, and that single price also includes case management, tracking, and AI tools, not just search.
The honest way to compare them is by workload shape. If screening runs through an automated pipeline handling large applicant volumes, a per-check or API-based specialist product usually fits better. If a legal, risk, or compliance team is doing screening and then needs to keep an eye on anything that turns up, a per-seat platform that does both in one place can work out simpler and cheaper overall.
06How to choose
Match the tool to how screening actually happens in your organisation, and what happens after a hit.
If you screen thousands of applicants a month through an automated pipeline, an API-first specialist such as Perfios or LegitQuest is built for that volume and workflow. If your legal or compliance team does screening manually or in smaller batches, and needs to track any litigation that turns up, a platform that combines search with tracking avoids re-entering the same matter into a spreadsheet after the check. Compare that approach against doing it manually: Claw vs manual case tracking and Claw vs spreadsheet tracking both cover why ad hoc tracking tends to break down once the caseload grows. If your immediate need is managing recovery litigation on an existing book of defaults, rather than screening before disbursal, Provakil or Legistify are built for that specific job.
07Where Claw fits
Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals. For a bank or NBFC legal, risk, or compliance team, that combination matters more than it first looks.
Litigation screening does not end when a check comes back clean or flags a hit. A clean result today can change tomorrow, and a flagged case needs to be followed until it is resolved. Claw’s case search covers 25 High Courts and the Supreme Court with name-tolerant matching built for exactly the kind of messy Indian names that make screening hard, and its case tracking then follows any matter that turns up across 8200+ courts and tribunals, with automatic updates, cause lists, and alerts, so a flagged file does not go quiet between hearings. For pure high-volume, API-driven pre-lending screening at very large scale, the specialist products above remain worth evaluating on their own terms. For a legal or compliance team that wants to search, verify, and then keep tracking, without stitching together a search tool and a separate tracking spreadsheet, that is where Claw fits.
08Sources and further reading
The tools discussed here, linked to their official sources:
- Claw: clawlaw.in
- Perfios (Litigation BI): perfios.ai
- LegitQuest (LIBIL): legitquest.com
- Provakil: provakil.com
- Legistify: legistify.com
- Reserve Bank of India (regulatory context): rbi.org.in
This is not an exhaustive list of vendors. Coverage figures and pricing are as published by each vendor at the time of writing and should be confirmed directly with them.
09Frequently asked questions
What is litigation screening software for banks and NBFCs?
It is software that checks a loan applicant, guarantor, or corporate counterparty for existing or past court cases before a lending decision is made, since this information does not appear in a standard credit bureau report. It is different from litigation management, which handles cases that already exist.
Which is the best litigation screening tool for banks and NBFCs in India?
Claw ranks first for teams that want fast, name-tolerant litigation search combined with ongoing case tracking in one platform. For very high-volume, fully automated pre-lending screening through an API, Perfios (Litigation BI) and LegitQuest (LIBIL) are purpose-built specialists worth evaluating directly.
Why does name matching matter so much in litigation screening?
Indian names are commonly spelled and transliterated in more than one way, and the same person can appear differently across court records. A tool that matches only exact spelling will miss real hits or flag the wrong person, so proximity and phonetic matching materially affects accuracy.
Is litigation screening the same as a credit bureau check?
No. A credit bureau report covers reported credit and repayment history. Litigation screening covers court and tribunal records, including cheque-bounce cases, SARFAESI actions, and civil or consumer disputes, which a bureau report does not show.
How much does litigation screening software cost?
Most specialist BFSI screening vendors, including Perfios and LegitQuest, price on a quote basis tied to check volume, and this is not publicly listed. Claw is priced per seat, roughly Rs 9,000 to 13,000 per year, which also includes case tracking and AI tools. Confirm current pricing directly with each vendor. Claw also has a free plan for individual advocates, with paid plans for teams and enterprises.
What happens after a litigation screening check finds a case?
A hit needs to be tracked until it is resolved, not just noted once. Some screening specialists stop at the report; platforms like Claw that combine search with case tracking across thousands of courts can follow a flagged matter forward, while tools like Provakil and Legistify are built specifically for managing recovery litigation once a loan is already in default.