JUDGMENT : 1. This Civil Misc. Application has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 09.05.2018 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur at Ara, in Matrimonial Case No. 361 of 2017 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000/-per month for his wife/ respondent and two minor children. 2. It appears from the record that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnised on 07.12.2012 as per Hindu rites and customs and out of their wedlock, two children have been born. Due to the reasons stated in petition, the petitioner filed divorce case bearing Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 36 of 2017 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The respondent-wife vide application dated 13.04.2018 filed an application for interim maintenance and litigation expenses stating that she has no source of income and is unable to maintain herself and her two minor children and the plaintiff is in government service and have much immovable property and he has income of Rs. 95,000/-per month. The learned Court below directed the petitioner to pay Rs.30,000/-as cost of litigation and vide impugned order petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.15,000/-per month as interim maintenance. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner, who is untrained Niyojit Teacher at Rana Pratap High School-cum-Inter College, Rampur Kala, Saran at Chapra has been receiving salary of Rs.18,395/-per month. A copy of salary certificate dated 27.04.2018 of the concerned college has been filed showing total salary Rs.14,288/-p.m. only. It is further submitted that petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing and the learned Court below fixed the quantum of interim maintenance on the statement of petitioner, without any proof in its support and the same is excessive and unreasonable which requires interference by this Court. It is also submitted that presently petitioner is not working as teacher in the said school. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the petitioner-husband failed to file reply of the petition of respondent u/s 24 of Hindu Marriage Act despite given proper opportunity to the petitioner-husband and the Court after considering the facts and circumstances has passed the impugned order which is justified. 5. It is admitted by the petitioner in the present petition that he has been receiving his salary of Rs.18,395/-per month. 5. It is admitted by the petitioner in the present petition that he has been receiving his salary of Rs.18,395/-per month. He has not disclosed other source of income. As per the copy of certificate issued by the school authority filed by the petitioner on record shows monthly salary of Rs.14,288/- p.m. 6. Provision of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for support to be given by the earning spouse in favour of non-earning spouse during the pendency of the proceeding before the Court. If the wife has no sufficient independent income for her support, she can claim maintenance pendente lite. The Court is required to take into consideration the income of the parties before deciding the quantum of interim maintenance. The Court has to keep in view the need of the applicant and paying capacity of the non-applicant. 7. The object behind Section 24 is to provide financial assistance to the indigent spouse to maintain herself (or himself) during the pendency of the proceedings and also to have sufficient funds to defend or carry on the litigation so that the spouse does not unduly suffer in the conduct of the case for want of funds. Section 24 contemplates a summary enquiry and warrant expeditious disposal. In the matter of granting maintenance pendente lite, the Court exercises a wide discretion but this discretion is not to be exercised arbitrarily. Section 24 does not lay down any rigid rule of fixing quantum of maintenance. It will depend upon various factors including the ability of spouse to earn, means and conduct of spouse etc. 8. The onus is on husband to establish with necessary material that there are sufficient grounds to show that he is unable to maintain the family and discharge his legal obligation for reasons beyond his control. If husband does not disclose the exact amount of his income, an adverse inference may be drawn by the Court. 9. A careful and just balance must be drawn between all relevant factors. The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic and avoid either of two extremes, i.e, maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be extra vagant which becomes oppressive and unable for the respondent nor should it be so meager that it drives the wife to penury. 9. A careful and just balance must be drawn between all relevant factors. The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic and avoid either of two extremes, i.e, maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be extra vagant which becomes oppressive and unable for the respondent nor should it be so meager that it drives the wife to penury. The sufficiency of the quantum has to be adjudged so that the wife is able to maintain herself with reasonable comfort. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha & Anr. (2021)2 SCC 324 given the general guidelines and directions for deciding a maintenance application. 10. In Ritula Sngh Vs. Rajeshwar Singh 2010 (4) Mah. L.J. 797 the Bombay H.C. examined the scope of Section 24 and 25 of the Act and held as under :- “10. The distinction between the law laid down under Section 24 and 25 of Hindu Marriage Act is distinct and clear. It is so because of the specific circumstances that the Court would require to see at the time of each of these applications. It may be clarified that for considering the application for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is decided upon affidavit of the parties alone, the Court cannot and would not consider the precise income, standard of living, conduct of the parties, other properties and other circumstances of the case. The ambit of grant of interim maintenance under section 24 is narrower than the ambit under Section 25. Under Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, the entire evidence, relating to the income, properties of both the parties and their conduct and circumstances would be and can be seen. This is because the evidence is led in that behalf at the time of final hearing.” 11. The monthly income of one party may not often be within the knowledge of the other party, when the relationship is considerably strained and spouses are living apart for a considerable period. The true income of the parties is within their personal knowledge and Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act specifically casts the burden of proof of the income on them. 12. The true income of the parties is within their personal knowledge and Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act specifically casts the burden of proof of the income on them. 12. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of impugned order and the material on record, it appears that the respondent-wife has to maintain herself and her two children and it is not the case of petitioner that she has other source of income. The petitioner being the teacher is liable to pay maintenance pendente lite. 13. Considering salary certificate of the petitioner on record and the principle of law discussed above, at this stage, it is in the interest of justice that the amount of interim maintenance granted by the Court below be modified. Hence, the amount of interim maintenance granted in impugned order is hereby reduced to Rs. 8,000/-per month instead of Rs. 15,000/-from the date of this order. 14. This Misc. Application is disposed of accordingly.