These appeals involve the decision of a common and only question, viz., whether the documents on which the respective suits are laid is inadmissible by reason of the provisions of section 35 of the Stamp Act. The trial Court gave the answer in the affirmative and dismissed the suits while the appellate Court came to the opposite conclusion and decreed them.

The operative terms of the documents in the two appeals are identical and they are to the following effect:

“ The on demand executed on 21st August, 1950.. .I promise to pay you or your order after a period of two years on demand by you the principal together with interest the sum of Rs.....”

The documents are stamped with four anna revenue stamps. It is not disputed that if the documents were held to be promissory notes within the definition contained in section 2, sub-clause (22) of the Stamp Act, they must be held to be insufficiently stamped, they being payable otherwise than on demand, the proper duty would be governed by Article 49 (b) of the Act, that is, duty as on a bill of exchange for the amounts covered by them. The question is whether the suit documents could be said to be promissory notes.

Under section 2 (2