Claw vs CaseTrack (Cubictree)

Comparison · Litigation Tracking & Case Management

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Tracking hundreds of cases across different courts, and knowing which ones actually carry financial or legal risk, is a real operational problem for law firms, corporate legal teams, and lending institutions in India. CaseTrack, built by Cubictree, is one of the more established tools aimed at exactly this problem, especially for banks and NBFCs that need to watch litigation across a large loan or account book. Claw tracks cases too, across a wider set of courts, and adds AI-based case-law search and an AI legal assistant in the same subscription. This page compares what each tool actually does, what it covers, and what it costs, so you can pick based on the job you need done.

01Why litigation tracking is hard once you have real scale

Litigation tracking, in the practical sense, means always knowing the current status of every case you are responsible for, without checking each court website by hand. That is manageable for five matters. It is a genuinely hard operational problem once you are tracking hundreds or thousands.

Cases are scattered across courts that do not talk to each other

A corporate legal team, a law firm with many clients, or a bank chasing recoveries can have matters running in the Supreme Court, several High Courts, district and subordinate courts, consumer forums, and tribunals such as NCLT, DRT, or ITAT. Each publishes updates on its own portal, on its own schedule, and none of them alert you proactively.

For lenders, litigation is also a risk signal, not just a calendar entry

For a bank or NBFC, a new case filed against a borrower, or a change in an existing matter, can be an early warning sign on an account. Watching this across a large loan book by hand is not realistic, which is why litigation discovery and due-diligence tools built for lenders exist as their own category.

Manual checking does not scale, and missed updates are costly

Checking court websites case by case works for a handful of matters. It breaks down at portfolio scale, whether that portfolio is a firm’s client base, a company’s legal docket, or a bank’s loan book. A missed hearing or a missed new filing can mean an ex-parte order, a missed limitation period, or a risk that goes unnoticed until it is expensive.

02What good litigation tracking looks like

For litigation discovery and tracking at scale, a few things separate a tool that genuinely saves work from one that just adds another dashboard to check.

• Court and tribunal coverage: how many courts it actually watches, including district and subordinate courts and specialised tribunals, not just the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• Automation, not manual data entry: whether the tool pulls updates directly from court sites on its own, or whether someone still has to key in status changes.
• Alerts that reach people where they actually work: a dashboard nobody opens is not much better than no tracking at all. WhatsApp and email alerts matter.
• What the tool does beyond tracking: whether it stops at “there is a new order”, or goes further, for example reading the order and scheduling the next reminder, or letting you also search case law in the same place.
• Pricing clarity: whether costs are published, so you can budget, or whether every plan requires a sales conversation.

At five cases, a spreadsheet works. At five hundred, tracking stops being a habit and becomes infrastructure.

03Claw vs CaseTrack, side by side

Both tools are built to discover and track court cases automatically, without manual data entry, and both use technology to surface updates rather than making a human check each court. The real differences are in coverage, what else the platform does, and how pricing works.

04Side-by-side comparison

05What each one costs

The two vendors are transparent to very different degrees, and that itself is worth knowing before you evaluate either one.

CaseTrack does not publish pricing on its website. Getting a number requires requesting a demo or a quote directly from Cubictree, which is common for enterprise litigation and compliance software sold to corporates, law firms, and banks, but it does mean you cannot budget precisely without a sales conversation.

Claw publishes its pricing: around Rs 9,000 to 13,000 per seat per year, and that single price covers case tracking across 8,200+ courts, AI-based case-law search, an AI legal assistant, and compliance automation together. Claw also offers a free plan for individual advocates, which includes Legal GPT, unlimited cases, case search, a daily personalised cause list, client management, and 20 GB of storage. There is no free tier for enterprise or team accounts; those are paid.

So the honest comparison is this: if you are a bank, NBFC, or large corporate with a complex litigation-risk workflow, a demo-based conversation with Cubictree may be worth having, since CaseTrack is built specifically for that scale and that risk lens. If you are an advocate, firm, or legal team that wants clear, upfront pricing along with case-law search and an AI assistant, Claw’s published cost and free individual plan make it easier to start without a sales cycle.

06How to choose

The right pick depends on who you are and what job you need done, not on which tool has the longer feature list.

If you are a bank, NBFC, or large corporate that needs deep, automated litigation discovery across a big portfolio, with dedicated due-diligence analytics, an arbitration module, and expense tracking by case, CaseTrack’s enterprise litigation-management tooling is built specifically for that scale, and it is worth requesting a demo to see it against your account book. If you are an advocate, law firm, or corporate legal team that wants case tracking across a wide range of courts and tribunals, and also wants AI-based case-law search, an AI legal assistant, and compliance automation in the same subscription, with pricing you can see upfront, Claw covers all of that without a separate research tool or a sales call to get a number. If you are still comparing categories, it helps to be clear that case tracking and case-law research are different jobs, and the tool that is strongest at one is not automatically strong at the other.

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. It is positioned as India’s first all-in-one legaltech platform of this kind.

Against CaseTrack specifically, the honest picture is this: Cubictree has built real depth for corporates and lenders that need to watch litigation across a large, complex portfolio, with features like an arbitration module and per-case expense tracking that go beyond simple hearing alerts. Claw is not trying to out-build that specific, deep due-diligence workflow. What Claw offers instead is broad case tracking across 8,200+ courts, combined in the same, published-price subscription with AI-based case-law search across 30 crore-plus judgements, an AI legal assistant, and compliance automation that reads a court order and schedules the reminder for you. For an advocate, firm, or legal team that wants tracking and research together, without a demo call just to see the price, that combination is the practical reason to look at Claw alongside, or instead of, a specialised discovery platform.

08Sources and further reading

The tools discussed here, linked to their official sources:

• CaseTrack (Cubictree): cubictree.com/casetrack
• Cubictree corporate litigation management: cubictree.com/corpLitigationSolution
• Claw: clawlaw.in
• e-Courts (official case-status portal): ecourts.gov.in

Pricing, coverage, and certification figures stated by either vendor are indicative and change over time. Confirm current numbers directly with each vendor before relying on them.

09Frequently asked questions