The main legal point established in the judgment is that an obligation must be created by the document itself to be considered a bond under the Kerala Stamp Act.

1. The simple question in this revision is whether the suit document produced by plaintiff is a bond or agreement. Answer to this question will determine the amount of duty and penalty payable thereon. The plaintiff who produced the document in the trial court called it a promissory note. The defendant wanted it to be treated as a bond. The lower court found that it is only an agreement. Hence, the plaintiff was directed to pay stamp duty and penalty accordingly. This Civil Revision Petition, therefore, has been filed by the defendant in challenge of the order as per which the lower court found that the document is only an agreement.

2. The document is dated 22-11-1983 It is written on a plain paper. It purports to have been executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The bried recitals contained therein read thus: "The amount of Rupees Fourteen thousand which I had received from you shall be repaid immediately (within two months) on completion of the sale of the property allotted to my share". If the document is a bond, the stamp duty payable thereon should have been at the rate specified in Art.23 of the Schedule to the Kerala Stamp Act (for short 'the Act') and hence the stamp duty and penalty will come to Rs. 3,479.30. If it is only an agreement the stamp duty, as per Art.5 of the Schedule as it remained in force on the date of execution of the document, would have come to Rupees three only.

3. One of the principles to be followed in interpreting a taxing statute has been laid down by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court as early as in Empress Mills v. Municipal Committee (AIR 1958 SC. 341) The principle is, if two interpretations are possible effect should be given to that which favours the citizen and not that which imposed a greater burden on him, The aforesaid principle can be followed in construing the provisions of the Act where the citizen has to pay stamp duty on the instruments defined therein.

4. The document in question cannot be construed as a promissory note. S.4 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, defines a promissory note as "an instrument in writing containing an unconditional undertaking signed by the maker, to pay a certain sum of money only to or to the order of, a certain person, or to the bearer of the instrument". Illustration (f) in the illustrations of the Section amplifies that if A signs an instrument in the following terms "I promise to pay B Rs. 500/- seven days after marriage with C', it is not a promissory note. The document in question does not contain an unconditional undertaking and hence it is not a promissory note.

5. S.2(a) of the Act contains the definition of bond. It is an inclusive definition which reads thus:

Status Appr"2 (a) "bond" includes -?

(i) any instrument whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another, on condition that the obligation shall be void if a specified act is performed, or is not performed, as the case may be;

(ii) any instrument attested by a witness and not payable to order to bearer, whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another; and

(iii) any instrument so attested, whereby a person obliges himself to deliver grain or other agricultural produce to another;"

In Halsubury's Laws of England, the bond is defined as "an instrument under seal, usually a deed poll, whereby one person binds himself to another for a payment of a specified sum of money either immediately or at fixed future date". (Vide Page 329 in Vol. III of the Third Edition). In Broom's Common Law (Page 289 in the 9th edition) a bond is defined as an instrument under seal whereby one person becomes bound to another for the payment of a sum of money or in the performance of any other Act".

6. In all those definitions, either under the statute or in common law, the distinguishing feature of a bond is that the obligation must have been created in the instrument itself. If the obligation was a pre-existing one it does not partake of the character of a bond. The