JUDGMENT:- The plaintiff in O. S. No. 29 of 1969 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Pudukottai is the appellant herein. She instituted the suit against the respondent on a mortgage Ex. A-1 dated 16-11-1964 said to have been executed by the respondent for a sum or Rs. 8000. The plaint itself stated that the respondent had repaid four sums of Rs. 50 each on 15-4-68, 30-4-68 and 21-6-68 and 30-7-68 towards interest and the suit was filed for recovery of the balance. One of the several defences that was put forward by the respondent was that she was not aware of the execution and due attestation of the document and that she had not even seen the appellant herein. She also denied the due execution and valid attestation of the mortgage Ex. A-1. On this question admittedly no attesting witness was examined as required by Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, in view of the denial of execution by the respondent P. W. 2, who is the scribe of the document, was examined. Having regard to this position, the learned trial Judge has stated that the effect of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, which requires the examination of at least one attesting witness to a do