Perfios Litigation Search API Alternatives (2026)

Buyer’s Guide · Litigation Data API

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Perfios is best known as a financial data and underwriting platform for banks and NBFCs, and its litigation search sits inside that wider suite, as one input into credit and risk decisions. If your team mainly needs deep, all-India litigation and court data, rather than bundled financial and KYC data, it is worth comparing Perfios against other API-based options built more specifically around court coverage. This guide explains what a litigation search API actually needs to get right, then compares the main options honestly, including where Perfios still leads.

01Why teams look beyond Perfios for litigation search

Perfios is a large B2B fintech data platform, built for banks, NBFCs, and other financial institutions that need financial data aggregation, KYC and KYB checks, and underwriting analytics. Litigation search, sold under names like Litigation BI and its legal search report, is one product inside that platform, covering cases across courts, tribunals, and regulators such as the Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts, NCLT, DRT, RERA, and consumer forums.

Litigation search vs financial and underwriting data

For a bank running credit underwriting, that bundling is a strength: one integration gets you bank statement analysis, GST and ITR data, KYC, and a litigation check together. But for a team whose core need is litigation and court data specifically, and not the financial and underwriting layer around it, the priority shifts. What matters most becomes how deep the court coverage goes, how many years back it reaches, how the records are verified, and how easy the API is to integrate for that one job.

Where the gap shows up

• Law firms and litigation funders doing due diligence usually want the deepest possible litigation history, not a financial risk score layered on top of it.
• Corporate legal and compliance teams tracking a company’s own litigation exposure across every court often need ongoing monitoring, not a one-time check pulled as part of a loan file.
• Product teams building litigation checks into their own workflow want a straightforward, litigation-first API, rather than one endpoint inside a much larger onboarding and underwriting suite.

02What a good litigation search API needs

Whether you are evaluating Perfios or an alternative, judge the API on the same five things.

• Coverage and depth: which courts and tribunals it reaches (Supreme Court, High Courts, district courts, NCLT, consumer forums, and so on), and how many years of records it holds.
• Search inputs: whether you can search by name, company name (CIN), PAN, case number, or address, and how well the matching handles spelling variations in Indian names.
• Data freshness and verification: how often records are updated, and whether the source is traceable back to the actual court record.
• Integration model: whether results come back in real time or through an asynchronous request-and-fetch flow, and how well that fits your product.
• What else you get in the same integration: whether litigation data comes bundled with financial and KYC data (useful for lending) or stands on its own (cleaner for a litigation-first product).

A litigation search API is only as useful as the courts it actually reaches. Bundled financial data is a bonus for lenders, not a substitute for coverage.

03Perfios alternatives for litigation search in India (2026)

The options below are ranked for litigation and court data coverage delivered through an API. Perfios is described fairly, including where it genuinely leads: bundled financial and underwriting data alongside litigation checks, which is exactly what a lending workflow needs.

04Side-by-side comparison

05What it costs

None of these vendors, including Perfios, publish fixed API pricing for litigation search. That is normal for enterprise data APIs in India: pricing usually depends on request volume, contract length, and which other modules you take alongside litigation search.

• Perfios, AICA, IDfy (CrimeCheck), and Attestr: pricing is quote or demo based, and typically scales with usage volume and which other APIs (KYC, financial data, underwriting) you bundle in.
• Claw: the core platform is priced at roughly Rs 9,000 to 13,000 per seat per year, covering case search, case management, and AI tools, and Claw also offers a free plan for individual advocates. API access and terms for programmatic integration should be confirmed directly with Claw, since these are separate from seat-based platform pricing.

The honest summary: if your team needs litigation data bundled with financial and underwriting data for lending decisions, Perfios or AICA fit that specific workflow. If your core need is the deepest, litigation-first court coverage, request a quote from Claw and compare it against a Perfios quote for the same use case, since list prices are not public for either.

06How to choose

Start from the job you actually need the API to do, not the vendor name.

If you are a bank, NBFC, or lender and need litigation checks bundled with bank statement analysis, GST, ITR, and KYC in one integration, Perfios or AICA are built for that workflow. See Claw vs AICA for a direct comparison of litigation screening built into an underwriting platform.

If your core need is litigation and court data itself, not the financial layer around it, prioritise coverage depth (which courts, how many years) and how well the API fits your product, over the size of the vendor’s wider suite. This is where a litigation-first API such as Claw’s tends to reach further into court and case history specifically.

If you already run KYC or onboarding checks through IDfy or Attestr, adding their litigation module to the same integration can be the path of least resistance, provided the court coverage meets your needs. Confirm coverage and update frequency directly with the vendor before relying on it.

If your team also does legal research or drafting alongside litigation data lookups, for example a law firm or in-house legal team rather than a pure data-integration use case, it is worth looking at a broader legal platform rather than a bare API. See Claw vs Nowlez for how AI research and drafting tools compare, separate from the API question covered here.

For background on how India’s court records get turned into an API in the first place, see court records APIs in India explained.

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.

For teams comparing Perfios litigation search alternatives, Claw is the litigation-first option: 1.5 billion+ case records and 30 crore+ judgements across 25 High Courts and the Supreme Court, live case tracking across 8,200+ courts including district courts and tribunals, and an API for programmatic access to that data. Claw does not try to replace Perfios’s financial and underwriting data business, which is a genuinely different job. Where the requirement is deep, all-India litigation and court coverage, with the option to add AI-based case research and case management on the same platform, Claw is built around that job directly rather than as one module inside a larger financial-data suite. Claw also does not use customer case documents to train AI models, which matters for teams evaluating data handling before integration.

08Sources and further reading

The tools discussed here, linked to their official sources:

• Perfios: perfios.ai
• Claw: clawlaw.in
• AICA: aicatech.in
• IDfy / CrimeCheck: idfy.com
• Attestr: attestr.com
• Supreme Court of India (official judgments): sci.gov.in

This is not an exhaustive list of vendors. Coverage figures and pricing for competitor tools are vendor-published claims and should be confirmed directly before you rely on them.

09Frequently asked questions