U;k;ky; us mDr U;k;n`"VkWr esa ,slk er rc izfrikfnr fd;k x;k Fkk fd tc okn bdjkjukek ds vk/kkj ij LFkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk ds fy, yk;k x;k vkSj ;g rdZ fd;k x;k Fkk fd oknh dks dsoy lafonk ds fofufnZ"V vuqikyu ds fy, gh okn ykus dk mipkj izkIr gS vkSj bdjkjukek dh jkf'k ds vuqlkj fcpkj.k U;k;ky; dks okn lquus dk vf/kdkj ugha gSA mDr U;k;n`"VkWr dk izlkafxd va'k ;gkW m)fjr gS& Held: It was vehemently argued by the petitioners/sellers that (i) a suit for specificd performance was the proper remedy and that the present suit for injunction was not maintainable; and(ii) that the valuation of the suit would be of the value of the price of the property and, therefore, the trial Court did not have pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the suit which was thus not maintainable. The arguments was repelled and rightly so by pladcing reliance on the case of Jugalkishore v. Nago and another (AIR1928 Nagpur 221) for the proposition that the forum of a civil aCourt in a particular case is determined by the nature of the claim as laid down in the plaint by the plaintiff, and secondly on the case of Moolchand v. Shri N,K, Satasangi and others (1992 JLJ 340) holding that the question of maintainability of a suit cannot by decided at the time of granting of temporary injunction either for want of jurisdiction of on other count. We are also of the opinion that the subject matter of the suit has to be decided according to claim laid in the plaint and in the present case the purchasers laid a claim of only premanent injunction. It was in this suit for permanant injunction that they made a prayer for grant of temporary injunction. The question whether such a suit was maintainable or not can be decided at the proper stage by the trial Court. 13& bl rjg mDr U;k;n`"VkWr ds rF; bl izdj.k ls iw.kZr% fHkUu gSaA bl izdj.k esa rks oknh us oa/kd j[ks x;s IykV dh fuykeh dks jksds tkus dh lgk;rk vkLFkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk ds ek/;e ls pkgh gSA D;k mDr lgk;rk og izkIr dj ldrk gS U;k;ky; dks bl okr ij fcpkj djuk gSA rks bl laca/k esa U;k;n`"VkWr eukst dqekj tSu ,oa vU; fc0 dkjiksjs'ku oSad ,oa vU; 2008 Hkkx 1 ,e0 ih0 ,y0 ts0 ist 619 esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ds }kjk ;g fof/kfl)kWr izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS fd foRrh; ifjlaifRr;ksa dk izfrHkwfrdj.k ,oa iqufuekZ.k rFkk izfrHkwfr C;kt izorZu vf/kfu;e 2002 dh /kkjk 17 ,oa 34 rFkk cSadksa ,oa foRrh; laLFkkvksa dk ns; _.k dh olwyh vf/kfu;e 1993 dh /kkjk 1¼4½ ds vuqlkj flfoy U;k;ky; dh vf/kdkfjrk oftZr gSA bl izdj.k esa Hkh oknh us _.k olwyh dh dk;Zokgh ds nkSjku dh tk jgh uhykeh dh dk;Zokgh dks jksdus dh lgk;rk pkgh gS tks mls iznku ugha dh tk ldrh vkSj fcpkj.k U;k;ky; us vius vkns'k fnukWd 04--09-2009 esa tks ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd oknh dks lh0 ih0 lh0 1908 ds vkns'k 39 fu;e 2 esa jkT; e0 iz0 esa fd;s x;s l'kksaks/ku ds vuqlkj uhykeh dh dk;Zokgh dks jksdus ds fy, vLFkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk iznku ugha dh tk ldrh og mfpr gh fu/kkZfjr fd;k gSA vkSj ;g U;k;ky; Hkh fcpkj.k U;k;ky; ds mDr fu"d"kZ ls lger gksrs gq, ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr djrk gS fd fcpkj.k U;k;ky; us oknh ds i{k esa izFken`"V;k izdj.k] lqfo/kk dk laraqyu rFkk viw.khZ; {kfr dk fl)kWr izekf.kr u gksuk ekuus esa dksbZ =qfV ugha dh gS] bl dkj.k fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds fu"d"kZ dh iqf"V dh tkrh gS vkSj fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks bl vihy ds tfj;s pqukSfrr fd;k x;k vkns'k fnukWd 04-09-2009 vikLr fd, tkus ;ksX; ugha gSA rn~uqlkj fopkj.kh; iz'u dz0 1 ,oa 2 ds mRrj udkjkRed :i ls fn, tkrs gSaA 14& mijksDr nksuksa gh fcpkj.kh; iz'u dh fccspuk ,oa muesa fn, x;s fu"d"kZ ds vk/kkj ij viykFkhZ@oknh dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g vihy Lohdkj ;ksX; u gksus ls fujLr dh tkrh gS vkSj fcpkj.k U;k;ky; ds vkns'k fnukWd 04-09-2009 dh iqf"V dh tkrh gSA vihykFkhZ@oknh bl vihy esa izR;FkhZ ds }kjk mixr O;; ds lkFk&lkFk Lo;a ds O;; Hkh ogu djsxkA fnukWd&10ekpZ 2010 LFkku&tcyiqj ,l0ds0PkkScs 19osa vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k ,Q-Vh-lh- tcyiqj e0iz0