Assertion (A) : The surety has no right to restrain execution against him until the creditor exhausted all his remedies against the Principal Debtor.
Reason (R) : The Liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the Principal Debtor, unless it is otherwise provided by contract.
Code :
Solution Analysis
This question presents an Assertion (A) and a Reason (R) regarding the legal position of a surety. We need to determine the truthfulness of each statement and whether (R) correctly explains (A).
Understanding Assertion (A)
Assertion (A) states that a surety cannot prevent a creditor from taking action against them (restraining execution) unless the creditor has first exhausted all possible remedies against the principal debtor. This means the creditor might be able to proceed against the surety directly without first suing or recovering from the principal debtor.
Understanding Reason (R)
Reason (R) states that the liability of a surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless the contract specifically states otherwise. This is a fundamental principle in suretyship law. It means the surety is liable for the same amount and under the same conditions as the principal debtor.
Connecting Assertion and Reason
The principle of co-extensive liability mentioned in Reason (R) directly supports Assertion (A). Because the surety's liability mirrors the principal debtor's, the creditor generally has the right to pursue the surety as soon as the principal debtor defaults. The creditor is not usually required to exhaust all remedies against the principal debtor first, unless the contract includes such a condition.
Evaluating the Options
- Option 1: (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A). This option accurately reflects the legal position. The co-extensive nature of the surety's liability (R) is the very reason why the surety cannot demand that the creditor exhaust remedies against the principal debtor before proceeding against the surety (A).
- Option 2: (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A). This is incorrect because (R) provides the direct legal basis for (A).
- Option 3: (A) is false, but (R) is true. This is incorrect because Assertion (A) generally holds true in suretyship law.
- Option 4: (A) is true but (R) is false. This is incorrect because Reason (R) states a well-established principle of suretyship law.
Therefore, both statements are true, and the reason correctly explains the assertion.
