Lalit Kumar S/o Laveji Ram Bunkar @APPELLANT@Hash Priyanka Parmar W/o Lalit Kumar

This appeal is directed against order dated 20.4.18 passed by the Family Court, Sirohi, in Family Original Case No.145/17, whereby an application

preferred by the respondent u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955( in short “the Act of 1955â€) has been allowed and the appellant has been

directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month as the maintenance pendente lite to the respondent and further to pay a sum of Rs.600/- as travelling

expenses on each date of hearing and Rs.5,000/- lump sum towards the proceedings expenses.

The appeal reported to be barred by limitation by 60 days, is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act. The only explanation

for delay in filing the appeal furnished by the appellant is that a false FIR was lodged against him and for thisreason, police was harassing him and

therefore, he could not file the appeal within limitation. Learned counsel submitted that on this court passing the order dated 13.7.18 in proceedings

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. not to take coercive action against the appellant, he came to Jodhpur and filed the appeal. In the considered opinion of this

court, the explanation furnished by the appellant for delay in filing the appeal is not plausible and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed as

barred by limitation. However, in the interest of justice, we have examined the matter on merits as well.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent has deserted the appellant without any justifiable reason and she is living separately

at Bangalore on her own volition and therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is living at

Bombay where the cost of living is very high, that apart, he is required to maintain his parents and other family members and thus, the maintenance

awarded by the Family Court is absolutely unjustified.

Indisputably, the purpose behind Section 24 of the Act of 1955 is to provide necessary financial assistance to the party to the matrimonial dispute

who has no sufficient means to maintain himself/herself or to bear the expenses of the proceedings. While considering the application for award of

interim maintenance , the relevant consideration is the inability of the spouse to maintain himself or herself for want of independent income or

inadequacy of the income to maintain at the level of social status of other spouse.

The desertion of the appellant by the respondent as alleged cannot be a ground for denial of maintenance pendente lite. It is not the case of the

appellant before this court that respondent is gainfully employed. Admittedly, the appellant is employed as Assistant Engineer in MTNL and drawing

the salary a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- inclusive of allowances.

Thus, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order impugned passed by the Family Court, directing payment of maintenance

pendente lite and other expenses as aforesaid, cannot be said to be in the higher side so as to warrant interference by this court in exercise of its

appellate jurisdiction.

For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal is dismissed.