IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2149 of 2008(E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- BAIJU.K.K., S/O.KUNJU, KOLENCHERY HOUSE, MATTOOR KARA, KALADY , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RENNY AUGUSTINE RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. 4. M/S.MOOLAN MODERN RICE MILL, KOOVAPADY P.O., ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, M.O.CHAKKUNY, S/O.OUSEPH, MOOLAN HOUSE, KOODALAPPAD, KOOVAPADY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC GP. SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 2149 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is one of the guarantors for the loan availed by the 4th respondent from the 2nd respondent. Apparently petitioner mortgaged his property as security. Petitioner is aggrieved that proceedings are taken against his property without proceedings being taken against the person or property of the principal debtor. 2. On instruction, learned standing counsel for the Financial Corporation submits that properties belonging to the principal debtor came to be sold in auction for realisation of the sales tax arrears. Apparently, the son in law of the Managing Partner of the 4th respondent himself purchased the same. The property belonging to the petitioner is yet to be brought to sale. What has been challenged here is only the attachment. I do not think the petitioner, whose liability is coextensive with that of the principal debtor, can seek complete exoneration from liability until the entire amount due to the creditor is paid off. W.P ( C) No. 2149 of 2008 2 3. In the circumstances, the only direction that could be issued in this case is to the Financial Corporation to communicate its reply to Exhibit P3. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and take a decision on Exhibit P3, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 2149 of 2008 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER 25th May, 2007