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

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more