JUDGMENT 1.None present for the parties. 2. This Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant husband against the order dated 07.08.2007 passed by learned Family Court, Sagar in M.J.C. No. 70/06 granting maintenance to the respondent wife to the tune of Rs.1500/- per month. 3. This revision is of the year 2007. Since none is present on behalf of the applicant, it seems that with the passage of time, the applicant has lost interest in prosecuting the case. Hence, this revision deserves to be dismissed in default. 4. Perused the Memo of Revision and order under challenge with the records. 5. Learned Family Court rightly after appreciation of evidence held that the respondent is a legally wedded wife of the applicant. 6. It is the obligation of the husband to maintain wife, father to maintain children and son to maintain parents. It will, therefore, be for him to show that he has no sufficient means to discharge his obligation: Rajathi vs. C. Ganesan (1999) 6 SCC 326 . Means does not signify only visible means, such as real property or definite employment: Basanta vs. Sarat 1982 CRLJ 485. An able- bodied person has sufficient means: Kandaswami vs. Angammal, AIR 1960 Mad 348 : 1960 CrLJ 1098 . In this legal position, learned Family Court rightly held that the applicant is having sufficient means of income Cr.R. No. 2075 of 2007 to pay maintenance and, therefore, rightly awarded the maintenance to the respondent. Hence, on the merits also, this revision deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed.