Skip to main content

Banks can't fix 60% marks as cutoff for study loans: Madras HC

The bank filed an appeal saying candidates who have secured 60% marks and above alone are eligible to get education loan, as they alone can be treated as meritorious candidates.

The bench, rejecting the submissions, said: "The government of India launched the scheme of providing education loans to economically disadvantaged people through nationalised banks. Sanction of educational loan is not free but is repayable with interest at a later point of time, of course, at a reduced rate of interest. The whole idea behind the scheme is to finance the economically disadvantaged people in their educational career. It is a social commitment for the upliftment of weaker, vulnerable and other sections of the society. It is a social welfare measure. In a way, it is some sort of social banking."

The judges said public sector banks and other financial institutions must bear the government's policy in mind while sanctioning educational loans to cover the genuine, reasonable and justified educational expenses and relieve the students and their parents from pressing financial crisis.

In this regard, the judges also pointed out that a review meeting of top bankers decided on September 27, 2013 that they would extend loans to meritorious students who get admission under management quota. It was also decided that loan applications have to be disposed of within a period of 15 days to one month.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Banks-cant-fix-60-marks-as-cutoff-for-study-loans-Madras-HC/articleshow/38098371.cms

Comments

  1. Anuj Sharma4 June 2020 at 19:06


    Awesome work ! I am planning to get an education loan but I was confused about the best deals available for me , your post gave me an amazing idea to explore for study loans australia . Nice post, keep posting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nikki Singh5 June 2020 at 17:29

    This information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing this information on Education Loan. For Study loan, visit here:
    Education Loan For Study In India

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

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

Loss of earning capacity, and not percentage of disability, must decide compensation, says HC

While computing compensation claims of accident victims, the victim's loss of earning capacity shall outweigh the percentage/extent of his disability, the Madras high court has felt. Justice R Mahadevan, enhancing the compensation payable to an injured driver by Rs 2 lakh, said: "In cases for compensation, it is not the disability, which is partial or total, alone that matters, it is the loss in earning capacity as a result of accident that is to be considered." R Murali, driver of a mixed concrete vehicle, met with an accident in January 2009 and suffered injuries in hip, right leg and ankle. He claimed loss of 100% earning capacity and sought appropriate compensation along with 12% interest rate. However, as the disability certificate issued by a doctor pegged the percentage of his disability at 60%, the deputy commissioner of labour-II, awarded Rs 3.12 lakh as compensation, by fixing the monthly income at Rs 4,000. Aggrieved by the poor package, Murali filed the...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 138 NI Act: Omission To Mention Nature Of Debt Or Liability In Notice Does Not Render It Invalid

In Crl.MC.No. 3289 of 2015, B.SURENDRA DAS vs STATE OF KERALA, the court was considering a petition seeking to quash the criminal proceedings on the ground that no demand for payment of the amount of the cheque was made by the complainant as per the notice sent by him and therefore, the notice is defective and the proceedings initiated against the accused pursuant to such notice cannot be sustained. The court observed that there is no statutory requirement that the complainant must specifically allege in the complaint that there was a subsisting liability. All the complainant has to do is to raise a demand for payment which is a notice to the debtor giving him time to pay but there is no format in which the notice is to be sent.
Post a Comment
Read more