JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant assailing the legality of the order dated 9.8.19 passed by the Family Court, Churu in Family Case No.141/18, whereby an application preferred by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act of 1955") has been allowed and the appellant has been directed to pay maintenance pendente lite a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month and litigation expenses Rs.500/- for each date of hearing to the respondent. 2. The appeal is reported to be barred by limitation for 10 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that on account of an inadvertent error, assailing the order impugned, he had filed a criminal miscellaneous petition before this court, which was later dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.9.19 with liberty to file miscellaneous appeal and thus, since the appellant under bonafide belief was pursuing a wrong remedy, the delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned. 4. For the reasons stated as aforesaid, the application is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the respondent is earning adequate income by work of tailoring and therefore, she was not entitled for any maintenance whatsoever. The appellant has responsibility to maintain his old aged mother and four children and therefore, he is not in position to pay the maintenance as determined by the Family Court to the respondent. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent has left the company of the appellant voluntarily and therefore, she is not entitled for maintenance for this reason also. 6. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record. 7. 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 independent income of his own sufficient for her or his support 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. 8. 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. 8. No hard and fast rule can be laid down for determination of the amount of interim maintenance. It has come on record that appellant is an Astrologer earning a sum of Rs.2 lacs per month. He has four banglows and three cars. According to the respondent, the appellant is having source of income from agriculture as well. 9. It is true that there was no concrete evidence produced on record establishing the income of the appellant as alleged. But, undoubtedly, there was sufficient material on record showing that the appellant has reasonable source of income. There was no evidence produced on record to show that the respondent has adequate source of income to maintain herself. Even if the appellant has responsibility to maintain his mother and four children, he cannot shirk from his responsibility to maintain his wife, who has no source of income of her own. 10. In this view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the amount of maintenance a sum of Rs. 7,500/- determined by the Family Court cannot be said to be in higher side so as to warrant interference by us in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. 11. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.