The amount of maintenance and litigation expenses awarded under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, must be reasonable and should be determined after considering the income, expenses, and standard of living of the parties.

( 1 ) THIS petition u/s 115, CPC, is directed against the order of the ADJ, Delhi, dt. 1. 12. 80 directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs. 1000. 00 as litigation expenses to the wife and Rs. 450. 00 p. m. as maintenance for her support w. e. f. 30. 9. 80, the date when she made an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act ( the Act ) in proceedings for divorce u/s 13 of the Act.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites at Delhi on 27. 1. 79. They lived together at Madras. The respondent is employed in I. T. C. Hotels. Previously the was posted at Hotel Chola, Madras but now the is posted at Jammu in Asia Hotel. The wife in her application u/s 24 of the Act, alleges that she has been in possession of few Share certificates of the value of Rs 2000. 00 and that she has no other source of income. She has claimed Rs. 5000. 00 as litigation expenses and Rs. 2000. 00 per month as maintenance. The trial court has held that the wife is not in a position to support herself and that her income from the share certificates is Rs. 100. 00 or Rs. 150. 00p. a. and she has no other source of income. As regards the husband the trial court has concluded that his net monthly salary was Rs. 1137. 00. The petitioner-wife feeling aggrieved has filed this revision. [s. 24 is then reproduced].

( 3 ) FOR determination of the amount payable first it has to be determined whether the applicant has any independent income sufficient for her support and to meet the litigation expenses. If it is held that he or she has no independent income, an order may be passed providing for maintenance and litigation expenses. The maintenance and litigation expenses are not in the nature of a permanent arrangement. It is only a temporary arrangement during the pendency of the proceedings under the Act. The amount on account of maintenance and litigation expenses has to be determined after taking into consideration the source of income of the opposite party. Section 24 of the Act requires the court to give a direction for monthly allowance such sum as it considers to be reasonable. Thus the statute does not require the court to make any mathematical calculation to arrive at any definite proportion of income of the opposite party for payment on account of maintenance or litigation expenses. The gross income of the opposite party has to be kept in mind for judging the standard of living. From the gross income one has to deduct the necessary expenses. The expenses may be compulsory or optional. Similarly there are various types of deductions made from the salary of an officer. The deduction may also be compulsory or optional. Compulsory expenses and deduction are to be deducted from the gross income and out of the balance a reasonable amount should be fixed for payment of the maintenance and the litigation. In other words, one has to determine the disposable income of the opposite party.

( 4 ) IN Smt. Preeti Archana vs. Ravind Kumar, AIR 1979 All 29 it has been observed "section 24 uses the word support and does not use the word standard or status . It is clear that the court must keep in view that one cannot live like a Lord and the other like a servant. There must be some balance. It cannot be that while one lives in penuary the other lives in grand style". It has been further observed that if a party has to pay insurance premium or provident fund or income-tax, these are necessary expences which must be deducted from the gross-income to arrive at a net income. In Kashinath vs. Smt. Devi, AIR 1971 Ori 295 it has been observed," in determining the quantum of maintenance, the courts have to take into consideration several factors like the status of the family, the earnings and the commitments of the husband and what is required by the wife to maintain herself". It has been further observed by Orissa High Court, "the court should not give maintenance to the wife which would keep her in