Co-extensive surety liability permits direct execution against the guarantor without first exhausting mortgage security.

A composite decree that is both personal and mortgage-based does not require the decree-holder to exhaust the mortgaged property before proceeding against the guarantor, unless the decree itself imposes that condition. The surety's liability remains co-extensive with that of the principal debtor under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, so the creditor may seek direct execution against the surety. Principles applicable to ordinary mortgage decrees do not control where the decree permits simultaneous enforcement and contains no restriction. An executing court cannot read additional conditions into the decree, and objections not taken at trial cannot later be used to resist execution.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in execution of a composite decree containing both a personal decree and a mortgage component, the decree-holder must first proceed against the mortgaged property before enforcing the decree against the guarantor.

Analysis: The decree, on its terms, was a money decree against all defendants and a mortgage decree only against the mortgagor in respect of the shop. It did not make execution against the guarantor contingent upon first exhausting the mortgage security. The liability of a surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and a creditor is not bound to exhaust remedies against the principal debtor or the security before suing the surety. The Court distinguished decisions concerning ordinary mortgage decrees and held that those principles do not apply where the decree itself permits simultaneous enforcement and imposes no restriction on execution. The executing court cannot add conditions not found in the decree, and objections not raised at the trial stage cannot be used to defeat execution.

Conclusion: The decree-holder was entitled to proceed directly against the guarantor in execution without first selling the mortgaged property, and the contrary view was incorrect.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a decree is both personal and mortgage in nature and contains no express restriction postponing recovery from the surety, the creditor may proceed against the surety directly because the surety's liability is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor and execution cannot be limited by adding conditions not present in the decree.

---