The liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of Principal debtor.

Refer
with case laws.
INTRODUCTION:- Surety’s Liability : The liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the
principal debtor, unless it otherwise provided by the contract for example A guarantees to B for
the payment of a bill of exchange by C, the acceptor. The bill is dishonoured by C. A is liable not
only for the amount of the bill but also for any interest and charges which may have become due
on it.
DEFINITION OF CO-EXTENSIVE:- Section 128 of the Indian contract Act provides the
following definition in respect of the surety liability:-
          “It says that the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor
unless it otherwise provided by the Contract.” 
A case of law in this regard is of Andhra Bank Soryapeet v/s Anantnath Goel-1991: It was held
by the court that where there were joint promisors and consideration was paid by only one of
them the other piomisors were equally liable to pay amount.  The liability of son was co-
extensive with his father who was principal debtor in view of section 127 and 128 of the Indian
contract Act.
The gist of some the leading cases in which the liability of the surety is co-extensive are given
below to strengthening the answer of the question:-
Kellappan Nambiar v/s Kanhi Raman-1957: In this case that if the principal debtor happens to be
a minor and the agreement made by him is void, the surety too cannot be made liable in respect
of the same because the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of principal debtor.  It has
been held that the guarantee of the loan or an overdraft to an infant is void because the loan to
the infant itself is void.
That in case of State Bank of India v/s V.N. Anantha Krishnam-2005: that in view of the
provision of section 128 of Act the Presiding officer was not correct in giving directions to the
Bank to proceed against the property because cash credit facility and the liability of surety was
co-extensive with that of principal debtor.
In a case of Bank of Bihar Ltd. v/s Dr.Damodar Prasad -1969: The Supreme Court held that the
liability of the surety is immediate and cannot be defended until the creditor has exhausted all his
remedies against the principal debtor.
A case of Industrial Financial Corporation of India v/s Kannur Spining & Weaving Mills Ltd.-
2002: It was held that the liability of surety does not cease merely because of discharge of the
principal debtor from liability.
In a case of Harigobind Aggarwal v/s State Bank Of India-1956: It was held that the principal
debtor liability is reduced e.g. after the creditor has recovered a part of the sum due from him out
of his property the liability of the surety is also reduced accordingly.
                                
CONCLUSION:- On deeply going into depth of provisions laid down in the Act it is revealed
that surety liability is co-extensive with that of principal debtor means that his liability is exactly
the same as that of the principal debtor. Suppose if the default having made by the principal
debtor the creditor can recover the same from the surety all what he could have recovered from
the principal debtor.