The petitioner is aggrieved with the deductions from the salary made, for satisfaction of a debt, availed of by the 2nd respondent from the 5th respondent. The 3rd and 4th respondents are said to be respectively, the wife and relative, of the 2nd respondent, who also stood surety to the loan. The petitioner, with whom the 3rd respondent was initially working, admittedly was co-obligant in the loan availed of by the 2nd respondent. On the default being committed, the petitioner was proceeded with. It is the contention of the petitioner that, the original borrower as also the other sureties were not proceeded with.
2. An interim order was issued in the writ petition, directing the 5th respondent to make similar deductions from the salary of respondents 2 and 3, who are the principal debtors.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent would submit that deductions are being made from the salary of the 2nd and 3rd respondents also; but not to the extent of the deduction of salary from the petitioner, since the deductible WP(C).No.27641 of 2012 - 2 -
amount under Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure [CPC] from respondents 2 and 3 is far lower from that which could be deducted from the petitioner's salary. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, since huge amounts are due, the deductions now made are not sufficient to satisfy the loan, since Section 60 can be availed of only for a definite period. In such circumstance, despite the hardship pointed out by the petitioner, there can be no positive directions issued.
4. However, the 5th respondent, looking at the amounts already recovered from the petitioner and the balance outstanding, shall consider whether the balance outstanding can be recovered from the original borrower; on a request made by the petitioner. It is also made clear that the petitioner would be entitled to proceed against respondents 2 and 3 for realisation of the amounts to their loan account; recovered from his salary.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
vku.
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran, Judge ( true copy )