A.O. No. 472 of 2010 Hon. Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon. Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate, present for the appellant. Heard. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.11.2010, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, in Misc. Case No. 02 of 2009, whereby said court has directed the respondent Anand Singh to pay litigation expenses amounting to ` 6,000/- to the wife (present appellant) and refused to direct to pay maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the appellant is already getting ` 1,250/- as maintenance from her husband (respondent Anand Singh). Keeping that fact in mind the trial court has declined to grant the maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the amount which is being paid by the respondent under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. could not have been taken into account for determining the maintenance payable under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. We do not agree with the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant. It is a relevant consideration to come to a conclusion as to whether during the pendency of divorce petition a spouse is entitled to maintenance or not, and to decide the quantum of maintenance whatever is being paid by the other party to the applicant under any enactment is a relevant consideration. The trial court has committed no illegality in passing the impugned order after hearing the parties, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed summarily. (Stay Application No. 10631 of 2010 also stands dismissed). (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 21.12.2010 HN