The petitioner was aggrieved with the deduction from salary, admitted to be effected by th e 1st respondent, to satisfy the loan taken by the 4th respondent. Admittedly, the petitioner , the 3rd respondent and the 4th respondent were government employees under the revenue department. The petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4 had taken loans from the 1st respondent; standing sureties, mutually, to each other. The petitioner is said to have repaid the entire loan amount. However the 4th respondent committed default. 2. The 4th respondent is also no more. The 3rd respondent is said to have retired. In such circumstance, the respondent Bank cannot be interdicted from proceeding against the petitioner’s salary since the liability of the sureties is co-extensive with that of the original borrower and the same is joint and several. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the deduction may be made in accordance with Section 60. However, this Court has in 2009(2)KLT WPC.No9881/2009 : 2 :
280 [Sasidharan Nair v. Trivandrum Co-operative Urban Bank Limited] held that Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code do not regulate recovery under Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.
Writ petition dismissed, reserving the petitioner, the remedy to proceed against the assets left behind by the deceased original borrower.
Sd/-
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge