Yes, a guarantor's property can be attached and proceeded against for a borrower's loan default in Ahmedabad, since a guarantor's liability under Indian law is generally coextensive with that of the principal borrower, meaning the lender can pursue the guarantor's assets, including their property, essentially as if the guarantor were themselves the defaulting borrower, once the conditions of the guarantee are triggered. Under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the liability of the surety (guarantor) is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless the contract of guarantee specifically provides otherwise, meaning the lender is not required to first exhaust all recovery options against the borrower before proceeding against the guarantor.

Where the guarantor has provided their own property as collateral security for the guarantee (as is common in many loan structures, particularly for business loans or larger credit facilities), and the loan is secured under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the bank can proceed against the guarantor's mortgaged property through the same enforcement mechanism used against the primary borrower's security — issuing a notice under Section 13(2) of the Act, and proceeding to possession and sale under Section 13(4) if the default is not cured, subject to the same challenge rights before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act that would be available to the primary borrower.

Even where the guarantor's property was not specifically pledged as security but the guarantor executed a personal guarantee, the lender can still pursue recovery against the guarantor's general assets, including property, through a civil suit for recovery of the guaranteed amount, and upon obtaining a decree, proceed to execution under Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which can include attachment and sale of the guarantor's property to satisfy the decree.

Where a guarantor believes they were induced to provide the guarantee through misrepresentation, or that the lender materially altered the terms of the loan without the guarantor's consent (which under Section 133 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, can actually discharge the guarantor's liability entirely if the alteration was made without their knowledge and consent), these can form valid defences to resist enforcement, and should be raised promptly, ideally before any auction or attachment proceeds.

Given how seriously guarantor liability is treated under Indian law, and the specific defences that may genuinely be available depending on how the guarantee was structured and administered, prompt legal consultation upon receiving any recovery notice as a guarantor is essential. For representation before Ahmedabad's courts and the DRT, the Top Property Lawyers in Ahmedabad | Aapka Legal Advice directory can connect you with suitable counsel, and reach out via Aapka Legal Advice for urgent guidance if you're facing action as a guarantor.

In conclusion, yes, a guarantor's property can be attached for a borrower's loan default in Ahmedabad, since guarantor liability under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, is generally coextensive with the borrower's own liability — but specific defences, such as material alteration of loan terms without consent under Section 133 of the same Act, may be available depending on the exact circumstances.