SM 1 24.mca.117.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2011 Mr. Rajendra Kashinath More and others ....Applicants. Versus Smt. Anny Kohly and others ....Respondents. ____________ Mr. B. V. Phadnis for M/s. Utangale & Co. for the Applicants. CORAM: R. M. BORDE, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 24, 2011. P.C.: The counsel appearing for the applicant has pointed out the Deed of Mortgage and more particularly clause 8 contained therein that all the disputes in respect thereof and its interpretation shall be subject to the jurisdiction of Mumbai. The counsel for the applicant pointing out clause 8 of the Deed of Mortgage contends that the suit needs to be transferred to Mumbai. It would be open for the applicant to raise an objection to the jurisdiction of the court in the suit presented at Pune. No case is made for transfer the suit from Pune to Mumbai as the property is situate within the jurisdiction of Pune and some of the defendants also reside at Pune. Sofar as the Miscellaneous Civil Application is concerned, it does not deserve any consideration. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is devoid of substance and stands rejected. (R. M. BORDE, J.)