ORDER (Per Mrs. T. Meena Kumari, J.) When the matter came up for hearing on 30-6-2003, none appeared on either side and hence the matter was directed to be listed on record by the respondent to show that the appellant has deserted him. On the other hand, it has come in the evidence that she was sent to her parents house in the month of Ashadam and thereafter she was not taken back to her matrimonial home either by the respondent or by his parents. The evidence also clearly shows that she is ready and willing to join her husband. In one of the letters she has clearly stated that she is willing to join the matrimonial home in the month of Sravanam and that neither the Respondent nor his parents are making any attempts to take her back to their house. In the background of the above evidence on record, it cannot be said that the appellant deserted the respondent. No material is placed either before this Court or the Court below to show that the respondent took any steps to get his wife back to the house, in spite of so many letters written by the appellant. It is also to be noted that the Respondent did not even care to give any reply to those letters. There is also no material to substantiate the contention of the respondent that she got aborted as she got pregnancy through somebody and that he did not reveal this fact to anybody. If the respondent suspected the fidelity of his wife nothing prevented him to send his wife to her parents house even in the month of June, 1986 itself. Furthermore, the Doctor who is said to have treated the appellant, was also not examined. The conduct of the respondent clearly shows that no attempt has been made either by him or by his parents or relatives to take back the appellant to the matrimonial home as did he not reply to any of the letters written by the appellant. As could be seen from the impugned order the Court below has not made any attempt to discuss about the contents of Exs.A-1 to A-8. As could be seen from the impugned order the Court below has not made any attempt to discuss about the contents of Exs.A-1 to A-8. In that view of the matter, the findings of the Court below that the appellant did not make any attempts by herself or through her relatives to sort out the problem and that as the parties are living apart for about 12 years and are not cohabiting, no purpose will be served by asking them to join and live together cannot be sustained. Thus, the findings of the Court I below are based on conjectures and surmises and cannot be sustained. 9. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, the C.MA allowed and the order of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, R.R. District at Saroornager dated 23-2-1998 made in O.P.No.120 of 1988 is set aside. No costs.