1. In a suit for recovery of a building with consequential reliefs, the plaintiff, in proof of his case, tendered in evidence a document executed by the defendant in his favour. On attention of the court being drawn to the Insufficiency of the stamp affixed to the document, the trial court held that the instrument has to be treated as a lease and it has to be stamped in accordance with the provisions contained in item 33 (a) (viii) of the Schedule to the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959. (referred to hereunder as the Act). The plaintiff-revision petitioner challenges the correctness of that order.

2. The instrument in question was drawn up in a stamp paper of the value of 75 paise and it was signed only by the executant. The document Is nomenclatured as hmSINo<

"'lease' means a lease of Immovable property, and includes also (i) Marayapattom,-(ii) Kanapaitom;

(iii) An agreement or other undertaking in writing not being a counterpart of a lease, to cultivate, occupy, or pay or deliver rent for immovable property;

The petitioner did not seriously dispute the proposition that the instrument in dispute falls within S.2 (1) (iii). In other words, the instrument satisfies the definition of