IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12219 of 2009 JAGDISHANAND GIRI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 17.09.2009. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is guarantor. He is in fact father of the loanee Satish Candra Giri. A sum of Rs. 9,50,000/- was sanctioned and disbursed by the bank in the year 1992. Thereafter the partnership firm defaulted in making the payment giving reason for issuance of impugned order dated 23.3.2009 by which the property in question has been attached on failure of the firm to pay the dues to the tune of Rs.14,30056/-. The petitioner states that the property has not been even valued by the bank. However, he has got it valued by approved valuer according to which valuation of the property is fixed as Rs.56,00,000/-. It is further submitted that if the property concerned is released, the petitioner would be able to sell it at a high rate which would be more than sufficient to liquidate the loan. It is also submitted that the bank in any event should sell a part of the property which may be sufficient to fetch a matching price. And if that be so, the rest part of the property may be released in favour of the petitioner on paying the loan indicated by the bank on the whole property. Learned counsel for the bank states that petitioner being guarantor of the loan, is also liable to pay the loan amount. If the petitioner files representation before the Recovery officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, respondent no. 4, he would dispose - 2 - of the same in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J).