Bannurmath, J.

The appellant - The Belgaum District Central Co-Operative Bank Limited, which is not a party in the Execution Proceedings No. 67/2007, has challenged the order dated 05-01- 2008 passed by the Executing Court/ I Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dvn.), Belgaum, on the application filed by the decree holder - first respondent herein under the provisions of Order 21 Rule 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. The judgement debtor, is a co-operative society. As per the provisions of Section 57 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, it is required to deposit 25% of the net profit as reserve fund. Accordingly, the judgement debtor has deposited the amount with the appellant herein.

3. The decree holder - society has obtained an award dated 27 -10-2006 for recovery of a sum of Rs.27 ,00,000/- with interest from the judgement debtor. In this regard the decree holder had filed an application for attachment and prohibitory order for disbursement of the amount in RFD Account No.8 of the judgement debtor maintained by the appellant bank. There is no much dispute, the said application was allowed and the attachment and prohibitory order was passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies. In this regard the decree holder has filed the present execution petition.

4. Feeling that there was no chance of recovery of the amount except by way of recovery from the said RFD Account No.8, the application in question, namely, under Order XXI Rule 26 CPC came to be filed by the decree holder. The Executing Court issued notice to the appellant and by way of objections the appellant contended that, no doubt, the appellant bank is the custodian of reserve fund deposited by the judgement debtor. But, as per the provisions of Rule 23 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Rules, it cannot invest or deposit the reserve with it except the permission of the Registrar of the Co-Operative Societies. It was also contended that as per Rule 23 of the said Rules, as there is mandatory restriction not only in investing but also withdrawing the reserve fund without sanction of the Registrar, the application of the decree holder under Order 21 Rule 46 CPC, cannot be entertained.

5. Dis-agreeing with this objection the Executing Court by the impugned order directed the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.30,51,785/- (decreetal amount) into the Court from the account of the judgement debtor within 30 days from the date of the order. It is this order, which is impugned before us in the present appeal.

6. Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant drew our attention to Sections 57 and 58 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act and Rules 23 and 24 of the Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Rules and vehemently contended that as per the scheme of the Co-Operative Societies Act, there is prohibition for the appellant bank from depositing the amount out of reserve fund except with the permission of the Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, the impugned order passed by the Executing Court is illegal and contrary to the provisions and the objects as enshrined under these Sections and provisions of the Co-Operative Societies Act.

7. On perusal of the entire records placed before us, we find that there is no much dispute that the appellant is a garnishee. The word’ garnishee’ has been defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition, as follows:

“A person or institution (such as a bank) that is indebted to or is bailee for another whose property has been subjected to garnishment bank.”

It is also necessary to consider the definition of ‘garnishment’ , which is as follows:

“A judicial proceeding in which a creditor or potential creditor asks the court to order a third party who is indebted to or is bailee for the debtor to turn over to the creditor any of the debtor’s property such as’ wages or bank accounts held by that third party.“

8. If we consider the provisions of CPC, especially execution proceedings governed by