Attestation of a document required by law to be attested is a legal requirement and must be proved by the attesting witnesses in accordance with Sec.63 (c) of the Indian Succession Act and Sec.68 of the Evidence Act. Adverse possession and limitation cannot be claimed without a valid plea of ouster.

.1. Defendant in O.S.No.282 of 1981, on the file of District Munsif’s Court, Ranipet is a appellant before this Court.

2. Respondent herein filed the above suit for partition claiming one half share in the plaint items. Admittedly, the properly originally belonged to late Murugan, who died in January, 1980. Plaintiff, i.e., the respondent herein, is his second wife, and the appellant is his daughter through first wife. It is admitted that the first wife is dead. It is the case of the respondent that Murugan died intestate, and herself and the defendant are the only legal heirs entitled to one half each. It is said that her husband never executed any will or settlement deed, and therefore, she is entitled to one half right in the property. Before the institution of the suit, a notice was issued, calling upon the defendant to effect a partition. It was in reply to that notice, the appellant contended that her father, i.e., the acquirer has executed a will and settlement deed. This according to the plaintiff, is not correct, and at any rate, it is further said that the will even if any, is created and is invalid.

3. In the written statement filed by the appellant, she admitted the relationship. But she said that her deceased father has executed Ex.B-2 will and also a settlement deed whereby properties have been bequeathed to her, subject to certain rights of the plaintiff over some of the items. She, therefore, said that the claim for partition is not maintainable.

4. The trial Court marked Exx.A-1 and A-2 on the side of the plaintiff, respondent herein, who got herself examined as P.W.1. On the side of the defendant, appellant herein, Exx.B-1 to B-3 were marked, and D.Ws.1 to 7 were examined, D.W.4 is none else than the appellant.

5. Trial Court, after evaluating the evidence, came to the conclusion that Exx.B-2 and B3 are valid and, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to any right except that provided in the document. The trial Court was of the view that the plaintiff is not entitled to get partition, and the deceased died testate.

.6. Aggrieved by the judgment, the respondent herein filed A.S.No.1 15 of 1985, on the file of the District Court, North Arcot at Vellore. The lower appellate Court re-appreciated the evidence and came to the conclusion that both Ex.B-2 and B-3 are invalid, and the execution of the same is not proved. A preliminary decree as prayed for by the respondent was passed. It is against the said judgment, the defendant has preferred this second appeal.

.7. At the time of admission of the second appeal, the following substantial question of law was formulated for consideration:-

."Whether the lower appellate Court is right in law in holding Ex.B-1 and B-2 are not true and acted upon by reversing the findings of the trial Court?"

8. As stated from the facts, the parties admit the relationship with the deceased, and if Murugan died intestate, it is not disputed that each will be entitled to one half share over the plaint items. The only ground on which the appellant disputes the claim of the respect is that her father died testate and that he has also executed a settlement deed and, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to partition. Being an exception to the ordinary law of succession, it is for the appellant to prove that the deceased has executed such documents, which dis-entitle the plaintiff from claiming any share.

9. It is not disputed that both the documents on which the plaintiff places reliance, are documents which require attestation. Attestation has been defined in Sec.63 (c) of the Indian Succession Act and also in Sec.3 of the Transfer of Property Act. Sec.68 of the Evidence Act provides as to how a document which requires attestation, has to be proved.

10. Sec.63 (c) of the Indian Succession Act reads thus:-

"The will shall be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom has seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the will or has been same other person si