Samera Vs. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Pudukottai District

Samera vs The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Pudukottai District

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Apr 26, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1191095

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1191095
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: B. Rajendran
Decided On: Apr 26, 2016
Case Number: W.P(MD)No. 23424 of 2015
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Samera

Respondent

The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Pudukottai District

Excerpt

.....the same, the petitioner is before this court. 3. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the application submitted by the petitioner may be directed to be considered by the respondent bank. 4. the learned counsel for the respondent bank submitted that the application of the the petitioner will be considered based on iba norms and the petitioner may be directed to file an affidavit for repayment schedule. 5. taking into consideration the quantum of money required and also the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent will consider the application based on the iba norms, the respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of loan and sanction the same in accordance with the revised rule and also taking into consideration the undertaking given by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. further, this court directs the petitioner to file an affidavit of undertaking before this court to the effect that in the event of sanctioning the loan, the petitioner / student will follow the guidelines with regard to the repayment schedule. such an affidavit shall be filed before this court as well as before the respondent bank within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. with the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to sanction the petitioner educational loan as set out in the Bonafide Certificate in Karpaga Vinayaga Dental Sciences, Chinna Kolampakkam, Kanchipuram District.)

1. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to sanction the petitioner educational loan as set out in the Bonafide Certificate in Karpaga Vinayaga Dental Sciences, Chinna Kolampakkam, Kanchipuram District.

2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has completed plus two with good marks. Thereafter, she joined first year BDS Course in Karpaga Vinayaga Institute Dental Sciences, Chinna Kolampakkam, Kanchipuram District. When the petitioner approached the respondent bank for availing educational loan on 09.10.2014, the respondent did not respond. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the application submitted by the petitioner may be directed to be considered by the respondent bank.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that the application of the the petitioner will be considered based on IBA norms and the petitioner may be directed to file an affidavit for repayment schedule.

5. Taking into consideration the quantum of money required and also the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent will consider the application based on the IBA norms, the respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of loan and sanction the same in accordance with the revised rule and also taking into consideration the undertaking given by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, this Court directs the petitioner to file an affidavit of undertaking before this Court to the effect that in the event of sanctioning the loan, the petitioner / student will follow the guidelines with regard to the repayment schedule. Such an affidavit shall be filed before this Court as well as before the respondent bank within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Samera vs The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Pudukottai... Same Subject Education Same Judge B. Rajendran