JUDGMENT

The petitioner was one of the sureties for the loan availed by the 7^th respondent from the 4^th respondent. The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the fact that the 4^th respondent-Society is proceeding against the petitioner without taking any steps against the 7^th respondent. It is also the contention of the petitioner that if at all recovery can be effected from the salary of the petitioner, the same will be subject to the limits under Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedur, 1908. The petitioner further contends on the strength of the judgment of this Court inJames Varghese V. State of Kerala and Others ; 2012 (4) KHC 251 and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pawan Kumar Jain V. Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation of U.P.Ltd and Others ; (2004) 6 SCC 758, that the Society could not have proceeded against the petitioner to the exclusion of the 7^th respondent-principal debtor. It is submitted that, in James Varghese (supra), this Court had observed that, there cannot be an unfair advantage to the principal debtor by the Society not proceeding against the principal debtor and proceeding only against the guarantor. It is submitted that, in Pa