IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 28019 of 2005(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VEERANKUTTY P. , AGED 55, S/O.KUNHI MOIDEEN, PALLIYALIL HOUSE, (PULIYAKKAL) INDIANOOR P.O., KOTTAKKAL. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAKKAL. 3. THE SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, KOTTAKKAL BRANCH BY ITS MANAGER. R1 AND R2 BY G.P. SMT. SMITHA R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAVI, SC, S.MALABAR G. BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE RATION CARD. EXT.P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PASS BOOK EXT.P2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PASS BOOK. EXT.P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE RR NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 28019 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of loan availed from the third respondent by another person for whom petitioner stood as surety. Recovery proceedings against surety is perfectly maintainable. However, petitioner has a case that he is surety for one loan and the recovery is barred by limitation. Limitation is a matter to be pleaded and proved through evidence. Similarly if the petitioner furnishes details of assets of the principal debtor, there will be direction to respondents 1 and 2 to proceed against principal debtor for recovery. Petitioner is given freedom to file objection on the ground of limitation before the first respondent who will consider the same and pass orders before recovery is continued. O.P. is disposed of with direction to respondents 1 and 2 to proceed for recovery against principal debtor and the guarantor, that is the petitioner, after considering the objections raised by the petitioner as stated above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge