JUDGMENT :

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.

1. These objections have been preferred on behalf of Judgment Debtor No. 1 Cooperative Society under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC against the attachment of property of said Judgment Debtor on the ground that the said Society is a Society of poor and marginal farmers, who have invested their entire earnings with the Society, and property of the Society has been raised out of the deposits of members and in case this property is attached and sold, the Society would be unable to repay the fixed deposits of its poor members and first right on the property is of its members, who are poor and marginal farmers and further that Judgment Debtor Nos. 2 and 3 were having vested interest as they had misappropriated the amounts of the Society and thus entered into compromise having adverse impact on its members.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record.

3. Perusal of record reveals that originally Decree Holder had filed a civil suit for recovery of Rs. 1,19,50,000/- against the Rajpura Cooperative Agriculture Service Society Ltd. (Judgment Debtor No. 1/defendant No. 1), Mr. R.K. Saini Manager of defendant No. 1 Society as defendant No. 2 and Mr. Manmohan Singh President of defendant No. 1 Cooperative Society as defendant No. 3. Initially, defendant No. 1 Cooperative Society was being represented through its President Manmohan Singh (defendant No. 3). However, it appears from record that at that time, Society was being managed through Administrative Board headed by Administrator appointed by the concerned authority. The said Administrative Board, by passing a resolution on 28.5.2010, had authorized its Assistant Manager Nasib Singh to take appropriate action for the benefit of the Society including consulting the Advocate and contesting the case in the High Court. Thereafter, Nasib Singh, the Assistant Manager of the Cooperative Society, had signed power of attorney on behalf of defendant No. 1 (Judgment Debtor No. 1) on 17.6.2010 which was filed in the Court on 18.6.2010. At that time, Nasib Singh was not party to the suit in individual capacity. However, later on 29.5.2013 after conciliation before the Mediator on 14.12.2012, on an application OMP No. 227 of 2013, preferred by the plaintiff/Decree Holder, the said Nasib Singh was impleaded as defendant No. 4 as an authorized officer of defendant No. 1 Cooperative Society vide order 30.5.2013.

4. During pendency of suit, matter was referred for mediation in November, 2012 vide order dated 9.11.2012 and Decree Holder/plaintiff and Judgment Debtors No. 1 and 2 had appeared before learned Mediator and parties have agreed to pass a decree for Rs. 80 lacs as a full and final claim in favour of plaintiff and the said amount was agreed to be payable within a period of one year from the date of grant of permission from the High Court to sell the immovable properties, on an application to be preferred by defendants and it was further agreed that in case of default in making payments, the defendants shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum on Rs. 80 lacs till final payment and further that recovery of entire amount will be affected in equal shares from defendants No. 1 to 3.

5. Later on, defendant No. 3 Manmohan Singh who was earlier proceeded ex-parte and was not present before learned Mediator, had appeared in the Court on 18.12.2012 and had deposed on oath that he had seen the report of learned Mediator available on record and being aware of the contents of report had admitted the same to be correct with assurance to abide by the settlement so arrived at.

6. Ultimately a joint application, OMP No. 228 of 2013 dated 29.5.2013, was preferred by the plaintiff/Decree Holder and original defendants No. 1 to 3 for passing a compromise decree in terms of agreement entered between the parties placed on record with this application wherein the settlement arrived at before learned Mediator was reiterated and endorsed. The ca