Partly allowed

Gunaseelan v. the Regional Manager

Madras HC14 Feb 2019WP(MD)/2675/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court directed Karur Vysya Bank to immediately consider an educational loan application for the petitioner's daughter. The Court ordered the manager to process the request after the petitioner履行了因补充要求和第三方担保要求，目前已调回应。案件未裁定贷款最终核准，但指令银行不得无理拒绝。

What did the court decide?

Bank directed to consider loan application immediately upon petitioner producing required documents and third-party guarantee; no costs awarded.

Gunaseelan Vs the Regional Manager — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.02.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN WP(MD)No.2675 of 2019

Gunaseelan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Regional Manager, Regional Office, Karur Vysya Bank, Post Box No.21, Karur – 639 009.

¶8

2.The Divisional Manager,

¶9

Divisional Office, Karur Vysya Bank, 16, Gayathri Illam, 1^st Floor, A.A.Road, Gnanaolivupuram,

¶10

Madurai – 625 016.

¶11

3.The Branch Manager, Karur Vysya Bank, Melur Branch, Melur, Madurai District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct respondents No.1 to 3 to sanction and disburse education loan a sum of Rs.7,48,000/- (Seven Lakhs and Forty Eight Thousand Rupees) to the petitioner's daughter namely, G.Selsiya for pursuing her course in Doctor of Medicine M.D (Equivalent to MBBS in India) at the International Medical Faculty, Osh State University, Kyrgyzstan, Russia based on the application dated 22.10.2018 within a stipulated time.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Karunanidhi

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.Pala.Ramasamy

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner seeks grant of educational loan for his daughter. The respondent bank have filed their counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner has to produce certain documents as sought for by the bank. The respondents also insisting on third party guarantee. The petitioner counsel states that the petitioner would fulfill the requirements set out in para 6 of the counter affidavit.

¶17

2.The petitioner shall approach the third respondent bank forthwith with those documents and the third party guarantee. The third respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ application for disbursement of educational loan for his daughter immediately thereafter.

¶18

¶19

3.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

¶21

1.The Regional Manager, Regional Office, Karur Vysya Bank, Post Box No.21, Karur – 639 009. 2.The Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Karur Vysya Bank, 16, Gayathri Illam, 1^st Floor, A.A.Road, Gnanaolivupuram, Madurai – 625 016. 3.The Branch Manager, Karur Vysya Bank, Melur Branch, Melur, Madurai District. Skm 1 CC to M/s.R.KARUNANIDHI, Advocate ( SR-47194[F] dated 14/02/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.PALA.RAMASAMY, Advocate ( SR-47887[F] dated 18/02/2019 )

¶22

WP(MD)No.2675 of 2019 14.02.2019

¶23

DS/ /SAR- (27.03.2019) 2P 6C

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Gunaseelan v. the Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gunaseelan v. the Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Epanechar Immanuvel @ Vs the State

R.Shanmugasundaram, Vs Deputy General Manager

M.Azhagu Sundaram Vs the Joint Director

Senthilkumaran, Vs the Inspector of Police

Paraman Vs the Inspector of Police

D.Ramanthan, Vs the District Collector