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. 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. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

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

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Infringement of copyright or other rights under the Copyright Act is a cognizable, non-bailable offence

Citation : M/s Knit Pro International Versus The State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No. 807 Of 2022;  Date of Judgment/Order : May 20, 2022 Court/Tribunal : The Supreme Court Of India Corum : M.R. Shah; B.V. Nagarathna, Jj. Background The Appellant had filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and sought directions from the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the registration of FIR against the respondent No.2 herein for the offences under Sections 51, 63 & 64 of the Copyright Act read with Section 420 of the IPC. The said application was allowed and an FIR was registered against the Respondent. The Respondent in turn prayed before the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings on the sole ground that the offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act is not a cognizable and a non-bailable offence which was allowed. This appeal is against the order of the High Court. Judgment The Supreme Court observed that the short question whi...