ORDER

This petition is filed to quash the attachment order passed in Crl.M.P.No.

173 of 2014 dated 20.01.2020 on the file of the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2.According to the petitioner, the respondents filed maintenance case as against the petitioner and the trial Court awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- each to the respondents. The allegations made by the first respondent are that due to the harassment made by the petitioner, the first respondent left the matrimonial home and residing with her parents. Thereafter, the first respondent filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichy. Thereafter the trial Court has passed an order to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- to each respondents through an order dated 07.11.2012. Against which, the petitioner preferred a criminal revision in Criminal Revision No.11 of 2013 before the I Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli and the said order was confirmed by the appellate Court through order dated 07.08.2013. The petitioner has not challenged the said order. Now the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli in Cr.M.P.No.173 of 2014 passed attachment order by attaching the salary of the petitioner. Thereby, he filed this petition on the grounds that the procedures have not been followed and the trial Court without issuing notice passed attachment order to attach the salary of the petitioner. Already the first respondent filed divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.921 of 2014 before the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli and the marriage was dissolved on 19.05.2015. Thereby the impugned order for attachment is liable to be quashed.

3.No counter was filed by the respondents.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the first respondent has filed petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., in M.C.No.111 of 2010 and the trial Court has passed order to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each to the respondents and same was challenged through revision in Criminal Revision No.11 of 2013 before the I Additional District Judge (PCR), Tiruchirappalli. The District Court also dismissed the revision by confirming the order of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate through order dated 07.08.2013. Thereafter, the respondents have filed Cr.M.P.No.173 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court in M.C.No.111 of 2010 to attach the salary of the petitioner. Without following the procedure, the trial Court has passed the attachment order. Hence, the attachment order is liable to be set aside.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has argued that already the trial Court has awarded maintenance to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- to each of the respondents per month. In order to execute the order, the respondents have filed Cr.M.P.No.173 of 2014 before the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli and the trial Court has passed the order to attach the salary due to failure on the part of the petitioner since the petitioner has not paid the award amount. The trial Court has passed attachment order by following the procedures. There is no necessity to interfere in the order passed by the trial Court and this petition is liable to be dismissed.

6.To support of his contention, he relied upon the following judgments:-

(I)Mani v. Jayakumari reported in 1998 Crl. J 3708.

(ii)S.Raja v. R.Dhanalakshmi and another in Crl.R.C.No.646 of 2021.

(iii)M.Bhaskaran v. The Chief Educational Officer and others in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19063 of 2019.

7.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on records.

8.On perusal of the records, it is observed that in this case, there is no contravention with regard to the relationship of the parties and there is no dispute about the quantum of the maintenance amount awarded by the trial Court. The only contention of the petitioner is that the first respondent already filed divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.921 of 2014 and the same was allowed and thereafter, without following the procedures, the trial Court has attached the salary of the petitioner. The trial Court has