As impact factor, citations, ICV value help in estimating the quality of a journal, please let me know if there are any such predicting values which help to determine the quality of a journal?
The impact factor and other values that you mention are of some help but certainly are not enough to make a definitive judgment of any particular journal. For instance, while for nearly any field a few top journals usually also have the highest impact factors, it often happens that many good (but not absolutely top) journals have fairly low impact factor, i.e. the impact factor and the perception of a journal by the experts in the filed are not necessarily correlated.
A first step should be to read articles of this journal. This already gives a good impression of the type of researchers attracted by the journal. And a measure of the work of editors and reviewers.
In addition, of course, impact factors, length of existence, the CV editors etc..
If you are considering publishing I would consider open access policies as well. In addition to the obvious need for it to be indexed preferably in medline (pubmed) and embase. If the question relates to how to assess articles when reading them, I would say that ranking the journals are quite often not relevant as a specific article will be suited for some but not all journals in the field. By that I mean that very good research might be too specific for any of the top journals in the field, remember that the bigger the journal the more power the editors will have, meaning that rejections will often be related to news-worthiness and not research quality.
In general I think impact factor is overrated, but high impact tends to correlate with more potential people with access to it, so that is good :)