The quantum of maintenance pendente lite to be awarded to a wife under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 should be determined considering the husband's disposable income, the wife's independent income, social status, age, education, and other requirements of the applicant for maintenance, number of dependent members and other obligations of the husband.

( 1 ) THE hearing stems from an application filed by the petitioner praying for revision of the order being No. 25 dated 07. 03. 2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Alipore in Misc. Case 3 of 2002 arising out of MAT Suit No. 28 of 2001.

( 2 ) THE circumstances leading to the present revision are that the O. P. /wife instituted the said suit for divorce and filed an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, being registered as Misc. Case 3 of 2002, on 15. 01. 2002 praying for alimony pendente lite @ Rs. 3,000/- p. m. and litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/ -. After considering the facts, circumstances and evidence on record, the learned Court below, by the impugned order, granted Rs. 2,000/- p. m. as alimony pendente lite and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost.

( 3 ) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, petitioner/husband has preferred the present revision.

( 4 ) MR. S. P. Roy Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, on referring to the pay slip and rent certificate issued by the landlord contended that when his client being an U. D. C. in the Ministry of Defence, Delhi and drawing a take home salary of Rs. 6,649/- only after all deductions, has to maintain an establishment at Delhi and pay Rs. 1,500/- p. m. towards rent and has to spend a considerable amount towards litigation in connection with three proceedings viz the said suit for divorce, suit for restitution of conjugal rights and criminal case under section 498a IPC initiated against him and others at the instance of O. P. /wife, the alimony @ Rs. 2,000/- p. m. as granted by the learned Court below is excessive and will cause hardship to his client. Mr. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the O. P. , on the other hand, on referring to the Written Objection against the application under section 24 contended that there being no whisper about the petitioner's residing in a rented accommodation at Delhi and payment of rent @ Rs. 1,500/- p. m. , there is no scope for considering the above rent certificate produced before this Court for the first time and that the amount of alimony @ Rs. 2,000/- p. m. being reasonable for the existence of a person in these hard days, there is no material to upset the decision of the learned Court below.

( 5 ) TO start with, in revisional jurisdiction Court has to consider not what could be believed by the trial Court but whether or not the view taken by the trial Court on a question of fact is also a possible view on the basis of the materials on record.

( 6 ) IN order to award maintenance pendente lite to the wife or husband, as the case may be, the Court has merely to consider whether he or she has any independent income for his or her support. The object of granting maintenance to the wife is to see that she may be able to live in a manner which is commensurate with the social status of her husband. The word ?maintenance? is not to be narrowly interpreted, as it means the most reasonable requirements for the existence of a person to live separate.

( 7 ) THERE is no hide bound formula as to the quantum the Court is to award as alimony pendente lite. Under the Indian Divorce Act, the proportion of one-fifth is fixed as the maximum, but such a provision has been consciously and deliberately avoided in the Hindu Marriage Act. Each case is to be determined on its own facts. In some cases, one-third of the income has been allowed, in some cases, one-fifth of the income and in some cases one-half of the income has been allowed. In fact, all the circumstances of the case have to be taken into account and then to arrive at a proper solution having particular regard to the factors mentioned in the section. In Pratima v. Kamal Kumar (68 CWN 316) it was observed that the husband's income shall be taken as a relevant fact and the maintenance shall be fixed regard being had to the social status, age, education and other requirements of the applicant f