Judgment : This revision petition arose against the order of the lower Court dated 22-08-2007 passed regarding the admissibility of the document dated 11-10-2004. The lower Court held that the said document comes within the definition of bond as defined under Section 2 (5) of Indian Stamp Act, therefore, directed the Office to collect stamp duty and penalty over the said document by treating it as a bond. 2. Being aggrieved by the order of the lower Court, the plaintiff preferred the present revision petition. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner Sri C.Venkateswarlu representing Sri C.Ramachandra Raju, submitted that the document referred in the impugned order is only an acknowledgement of receipt of the amount and it cannot be treated as a bond. 3. Section 2 (5) of the Act defines 'bond' which reads as follows: "2 (5) Bond:- Bond includes,- (a) 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: (b) any instrument attested by a witness and not payable to order to bearer, whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another; and (c) any instrument so attested, whereby a person obliges himself to deliver grain or other agricultural produce to another;" From the reading of the above Section, it is clear that there must be an express obligation on the part of the executant to pay the money to bring any document under the definition of the bond. In the present case the disputed document describes "an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been borrowed from Peddyreddy Eswaramma on 11-10-2004 at Rs.2/- interest". 4. In Kashaboina Bala Ram Vs. Gopagani Buchi Ramulu 1969 (2) Andhra Weekly Reporter 263 this Court while considering the scope of Section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act held as follows: "The mere fact that the document contains the nature of acknowledgment as towards loan and it is also attested by witnesses, is not sufficient to convert what is otherwise a mere acknowledgment into a bond which itself creates an obligation to pay the money." 5. After going through the document, I am convinced that the said document can be treated only as an acknowledgment, but not as a bond, therefore, I am inclined to set aside the order of the lower Court. 6. After going through the document, I am convinced that the said document can be treated only as an acknowledgment, but not as a bond, therefore, I am inclined to set aside the order of the lower Court. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order of the lower Court. The lower Court is directed to treat the document as an acknowledgment and collect the stamp duty and penalty, if any, according to law.