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

Merits and the terms of contract are irrelevant for invoking of the bank guarantees

In Sabarkantha Annuity Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NHAI and Ors, the Petitioner filed before the Delhi High Court  petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 with a prayer that, Respondents be restrained from acting upon the letter dated 15th September, 2017 or from invoking the Bid securities of the Petitioner to the tune of Rs. 10.93 Crores and also restraining the banks from honouring the invocation of said bank guarantees on behalf of Respondent No. 1 acting in terms of letter dated 3rd November, 2007. Petitioner has relied upon Clauses Nos. 9.1.1, 9.1.2 and 4.3 of the agreement dated 28th April, 2017 entered into between the parties to say the claim for damages since is not a claim for a sum presently due and payable and the respondent would be entitled to damages only on proof of loss, per Clause 4.3 of the agreement and hence is not entitle to the entire sum of bid security.  The Court found that Clause No. 9.1.2 speaks of an exclusiv...
Post a Comment
Read more

Right of pre-emption under West Bengal Land Reform Act

In Rabindra Nath Kundu & Anr vs Sudhir Hira, Bijoy Krishna Hira being the owner in the suit plot, gifted to Santosh Kumar Hira demarcated 11 decimals of land vide deed of gift dated 27.4.2004 and the latter sold 9 decimals out of 11 decimals of land to Sudhir Hira the preemptor/opposite party no. 1 and well demarcated 1.65 decimals of land in the said plot along with several other plots were sold, transferred and conveyed to the preemptees/petitioners herein by a registered deed of sale dated 10.8.2010, the subject matter of preemption. It is argued on behalf of the preemptees that  the present opposite party no. 1/preemptor Sudhir Hira has no relationship of co-sharership with Santosh Kumar Hira opposite party no. 2 as the demarcated portion of land has been purchased. It is settled principle of law that partial preemption is not permissible and this was what the view adopted by this Hon'ble High Court is Surendra Vs. Abhimannu reported in (1980) 1 Cal LJ 135 whe...
Post a Comment
Read more

CBI has no jurisdiction to probe affairs of medical college:HC

The Madras High Court has quashed charges against administrators of a medical college and dismissed CBI's petitions opposing discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, saying the investigation agency, or any other external agency for that matter, has no jurisdiction to probe the affairs of a medical college. Quashing the charges against the administrators of a medical college and dismissing CBI's petitions opposing the discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, Justice Aruna Jagadeesan said "contravention of rules and regulations may be an offence against the statute but is not a crime. There is no room or jurisdiction for any external agency to investigate the affairs of any medical institution coming within the purview of the Medical Council of India." In identical set of orders, all delivered on August 6, Justice Jagadeesan said "the shortfall in faculties and submissions of fake/forged documents would only disentitle the institution...
Post a Comment
Read more