Skip to main content

Can't reject education loan over arrears: High Court

Holding that banks cannot deny educational loans on the grounds that a student has examination arrears, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has directed a Canara Bank branch in Karaikudi in Sivaganga district to sanction Rs 3.60 lakh as loan to an engineering college student.
The student V P Infant Ranjith is pursuing BE Computer Science Engineering in a private engineering college near Chennai. His father V K Peter Rajan, an advocate, filed a petition stating that the Canara Bank, Sankarapuram Branch in Sivaganga had refused to sanction an education loan during 2011 stating that they had already reached the cumulative loan sanctioning limit for the year. The bank officials advised him to approach the next year.
The following year when he applied for a loan of Rs 3.60 lakh, the bank kept his application pending but orally indicated to him that since he is an advocate it would be difficult to recover the loan amount. Besides, Ranjith had failed in a subject in the second year and hence loan cannot be granted to him.
Refusing to accept the bank’s contention, Justice N Kirubakaran said in engineering education the compartmental system was followed (allowing students to clear arrears in subsequent semesters). “It is not fair on the part of the bank to reject the application on the ground that the student failed in one subject,” he said.
Justice Kirubakaran said, “The bank is granting educational loan subject to rules and regulations and if there is failure on repayment of loan, it is always open to the bank to take recovery action.”
Hence, he directed the bank to process the education loan within 10 days.


Comments

  1. vishal15 March 2019 at 17:00

    It was really pleasure to read such a beautiful piece of Article. It just should have elaborated more to get the proper insights but if you are looking for more information just continue to - Education Loans For Students

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown16 September 2020 at 18:49

      This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  2. Subhajit Roy31 December 2019 at 16:46

    Much obliged to you for sharing the information, I have the best information about Study Loan.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there
Post a Comment
Read more

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t
Post a Comment
Read more

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even
Post a Comment
Read more