Heard both the counsel at the admission stage. The petitioner is the husband of the 1st respondent filed O.P.No.1330 of 2008 seeking divorce against his wife-1st respondent herein under Section 13 (1) (i), (1) (a) and () (b) on the ground of adultery, cruelty and desertion. All the allegations of the averments have been denied by the respondent in her counter. During pendency of the O.P., the 1st respondent wife filed I.A.No.670 of 2009 seeking payment of maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- per month and Rs.50,000/- towards legal expenses to defend the case. It is stated in her affidavit that ever since the petitioner and her parent- in-law refused to allow into matrimonial house and her parents. She is staying at Pragathi Charitable Trust and she has lost her job also and she is depending upon the Pragathi Charitable Trust for her livelihood. The petitioner is earning more than Rs.2,00,000/- per month, but he is not maintaining her. Since, she has no source of income to maintain herself and to defend herself and the said application is filed for maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. A counter has been filed by the husband denying the allegations. He never refused her to enter and live in his house and she is not staying at Pragati Charitable Trust but in fact, she is residing at Flat No.3, Door No.49- 39-9, Sai Kuteer, Akkayapalem, Visakhapatnam. The said application is filed giving wrong address and getting lawful gain. The allegation that the petitioner and his parents did not allow her to enter into their house is incorrect. The reasons shown for filing case on the domestic violence is not admitted. The allegations that he was earning Rs.2,00,000/- per month but he failed to maintain her and that she has no means to maintain herself and to defend the case is also denied and stated that the petitioner is put to strict proof of the said allegations. It is stated that though she is living in the Pragathi Charitable Trust, she is getting her own independent income by doing job in NIITS and other organizations. It is stated by the husband in his counter that she is having extra marital relations with others, which was condemned and, therefore, the petitioner as to condemn her illegal activities and objected for extra marital relations with others and, therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance amount. The questions that arise for consideration as to whether the respondent is entitled for any maintenance amount and if so, the quantum of amount? It is not in dispute that the O.P. filed by the husband seeking divorce on various grounds is pending. Under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the wife is entitled for maintenance pending lit as well as expenses of the proceedings. It is not in dispute that the respondent is entitled for maintenance amount as well as expenses for proceedings. The further question that arises for consideration is as to what is the monthly income of the petitioner. According to the respondent, the respondent is getting more than Rs.2,00,000/- but the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband submits that his monthly income is Rs.1,67,000/- as per appointment agreement for DKS Private Limited, dated 13-06-2008 and the said agreement was only for a period of two months from the date of commencement. It is stated that after two months, the said agreement was not continued and he is not getting the appointment or opportunity to work regularly throughout the year without any interest. It is stated that he gets salary as and when he is on board the vessels. It is further stated that as the vessel in which he was working was sold. The remaining was settled by paying the final amount of Rs.80,000/- in which he worked the period of June, 2008 to August, 2008. It is stated that the respondent is also getting monthly salary of Rs.10,000/- by working as Academic Director in NIIT, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam since August, 2006. Though the agreement was for a period of two months. Admittedly, he has worked for more than two months in the Esquire Shipping and Trading Private Limited from 16-06-2008 to 08-08-2008. There is no other material that has been placed or pleaded by the petitioner that he was out of job subsequently. The petitioner has also not placed any material that the respondent is still working in the NIIT whereas it is the specific case of the wife that as she has unable to do regularly she was removed and she did not join and, therefore, she is not working anywhere. As the averments and the denial in the said applications filed for payment of the interim maintenance are not seriously contested by placing any evidence by both the parties. We are of the opinion that the court below rightly enquired into the matter based on the petition and the counter and other material allowed the application, But, however, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the job of the petitioner is not permanent one and he is getting the employment on contract basis periodically. We deem it appropriate that if the monthly maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- per month as reduced to Rs.18,000/- would meet the ends of justice. Insofar as payment of legal expenses of Rs.10,000/- is concerned, we are not inclined to interfere. Accordingly, we allow the appeal in part by modifying the order of the Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam, by reducing monthly maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- to Rs.18,000/- from the date of filing of the petition i.e., 10-11- 2008 and the arrears payable upto the month of April shall be paid by 10th of May, 2010 and the petitioner is further directed to pay monthly maintenance on or before 10th of every succeeding month payable for the months of May, 2010 onwards. The petitioner shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses by the end of April, 2010. The said amounts shall be deposited either to the credit of O.P. or to the bank account of the respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.