IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^.v W ■ ‘ PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NOS: 710 AND 643 OF 2024 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 710 OF 2024: APHC010501012024 Appeal filed under Order 43, Rule 1 of CPC, against the Order and Decree, dated 12-08-2024 passed in I.A.No.636 of 2023 in O.S.No.12 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh: Between: Arudra Infra Developers Pvt Ltd., Rep.by its Director Sri Nookala Suresh, Near Chekkalameda, Rajupeta, Machilipatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. Krishna ...Appellant/D-6 AND 1. Bondada Subba Lakshmi, W/o.B.Narayana Rao Housewife, R/o.D.No.9-130, Satyanarayanapuram, 0pp.MDO Ramanayyapeta, Kakinada, Kakinada District, AP. v' A aged 65 years, Occ: Office, ...Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff 2. Reddem Sreeramarao, S/o.Venkata Satya Uppayya, R/o.D.No.11-21 6, Reddam Street @ Usthad Street, Near Gali Gangalamma Temple, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, AP. 3. Reddem Brahmmaji Rao, S/o.Venkata Satya Uppayya Satyanarayanapuram, Opp.MDO Office Kakinada, Kakinada District, AP. 4. Sunkara Varalakshmi, W/o.Ganapathi Appa Rao, D/o.Mummidi Venkayamma, R/o.D.No.1-17-1/2, Sunkavari Street, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. Yerrampati Usharani, W/o.Nagendra Rao, D/o.Mummidi R/o.D.No.3-8-5, Cinema Road, Tuni, East Godavari District R/o.D.No.9-130, Road, Ramanayyapeta, Kondayyapalem, Venkayamma, AP. 6. Pandrangi Padma, W/o.Appa Rao D/o.Mummidi Venkayamma, R/o.D.No.3-22-56, Cinema Road, Tuni, East Godavari District AP. 7. Reddem Appaji, S/o.Srirama Rao, R/o.Flat No.401, Vyshnavi Mayfair Apartments, Varalakshmipuram Colony, Kanuru Village, Vijayawada (Rural), Krishna District, AP. 8. Reddem Suresh Kumar, So.Sriramarao, aged 49 years, Occ:Business, R/o.D.No.24-46-4, Samantha Nagar, Near Samantha Office, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. aged 50 years, Occ;Employee, Nagar Post 9. Reddem Sita Devi @ Saladi Sitadevi, W/o.Venkata Ramana Rao D/o.Sriramarao, aged 51 years, Occ;Housewife R/o.D. No. 70-7-2/7/4, Priyanka Residency, Nagarjuna Road, Siddardhanagar, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. lO.Reddem Sudha @ Muthyam Sudha, W/o.Late Surya Rao, D/o.Reddam Srirama Rao, aged 42 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o.D.No.49-48-24/4, NGGOs Colony, Santhipuram, Near Municipal Park, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. (Respondents 2 to 10 are not necessary parties) ...Respondents/Respondents 1 to 5 & 7 to 10/ Defendants 1 to 5 & 7 to 10 lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition filed under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Order and Decree dated 12-08-2024 passed in I.A.No.636 of 2023 in O.S.No.12 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh pending disposal of the above appeal. Counsel for the Appellant; Sri Turaga Sai Surya Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 643 OF 2024: APHC010443302024 Appeal filed under Order 43, Rule 1 of CPC, against the Order and Decree, dated 12-08-2024 passed in I.A.No.636 of 2023 in O.S.No.12 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh. Between: 1. Reddem Sreeramarao, S/o.Venkata Satya Uppayya, R/o.D.No.11-21 6, Reddam Street @ Usthad Street, Near Gali Gangalamma Temple, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, AP. 2. Reddem Appaji, S/o.Srirama Rao, aged 50 years, Occ:Employee, R/o.Flat No.401, Vyshnavi Mayfair Apartments, Varalakshmipuram Colony, Kanuru Village, Vijayawada (Rural), Krishna District, AP. 3. Reddem Suresh Kumar, So.Sriramarao, aged 49 years, Occ:Business, R/o.D.No.24-46-4, Samantha Nagar, Near Samantha Nagar Post Office, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. Reddem Sita Devi @ Saladi Sitadevi, W/o.Venkata Ramana Rao D/o.Sriramarao, aged 51 years, Occ;Housewife, R/o.D.No.70-7-2/7/4, Priyanka Residency, Nagarjuna Road, Siddardhanagar, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. Reddem Sudha (g Muthyam Sudha, W/o.Late Surya Rao, D/o.Reddam Srirama Rao, aged 42 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o.D.No.49-48-24/4, NGGOs Colony, Santhipuram, Near Municipal Park, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. ...Appellants/Respondents 1, 7 to 10/Defendants 7 to 10 AND 1. Bondada Subba Lakshmi, W/o.B.Narayana Rao, aged 65 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o.D.No.9-130, Satyanarayanapuram, Opp.MDO Office, Ramanayyapeta, Kakinada, Kakinada District, AP. ...Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff 2. Reddem Brahmmaji Rao, S/o.Venkata Satya Uppayya, R/o.D.No.9-130, Road, Ramanayyapeta, ( Satyanarayanapuram, Opp.MDO Office Kakinada, Kakinada District, AP. 3. Sunkara Varalakshmi, W/o.Ganapathi Appa Rao, D/o.Mummidi Venkayamma, R/o.D.No.1-17-1/2, Sunkavari Street Kondayyapalem, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. Yerrampati Usharani, W/o.Nagendra Rao, D/o.Mummidi Venkayamma R/o.D.No.3-8-5, Cinema Road, Tuni, East Godavari District, AP. 5. Pandrangi Padma, W/o.Appa Rao, R/o.D.No.3-22-56, Cinema Road, Tuni, East Godavari District, AP. 6. Arudra Infra Developers Pvt Ltd., Rep.by its Director Sri Nookala Suresh, Near Chekkalameda, Rajupeta, Machilipatnam, District, Andhra Pradesh. (Respondents 2 to 6 are not necessary) D/o.Mummidi Venkayamma, Krishna ...Respondents/Respondents 2 to 6/ Defendants 2 to 6 lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition filed under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Order and Decree dated 12-08-2024 passed in I.A.No.636 of 2023 in O.S.No.12 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh pending disposal of the above appeal. Counsel for the Appellants: Sri K.Chidamaram, Senior Counsel, representing Sri G.Yaswanth Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 5:Sri Balaji Medamalli The Court made the following; f APHC010501012024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3527] THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NOs: 710 & 643/2024 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 710 of 2024 Between: 1.ARUDRA INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI NOOKALA SURESH NEAR CHEKKALAMEDA. RAJUPETA MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. ...APPELLANT AND 1. BONDADA SUBBA LAKSHMI, W/O.B.NARAYANA RAO AGED 65 HOUSEWIFE SATYANARAYANAPURAM OPP.MDO OFFICE, RAMANAYYAPETA KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, AP 2. REDDEM SREERAMARAO, S/O.VENKATA SATYA UPPAYYA R/O.D.NO.11-216, REDDAM STREET @ USTHAD STREET. NEAR GALI GANGALAMMA TEMPLE PITHAPURAM, E.G.DISTRICT, AP 3. REDDEM BRAHMMAJI RAO, S/O.VENKATA SATYA UPPAYYA R/O.D.NO.9-130. SATYANARAYANAPURAM OPP.MDO OFFICE ROAD, RAMANAYYAPETA KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, AP 4. SUNKARA VARALAKSHMI, W/O.GANAPATHI APPA RAO D/O.MUMMIDI VENKAYAMMA STREET ANDHRA PRADESH YEARS, OCC R/O.D.NO.9-130, R/O.D.NO.1-17-1/2, SUNKAVARI KONDAYYAPALEM, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT 2 HBKM,J & ahhs\j ' C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 5. yerrampati usharani, w/o.nagendra VENKAYAMMA, R/O.D.NO.3-8-5 GODAVARI DISTRICT, AP PADMA, VENKAYAMMA R/O.D.NO.3-22-56 GODAVARI DISTRICT AP RAO D/O.MUMMIDI CHINEMA ROAD, TUNI EAST 6. PANDRANGI W/O.APPA RAO D/O.MUMMIDI CINEMA ROAD TUNI, EAST 7. REDDEM APPAJI, S/O.SRIRAMA R/O.FLAT RAO AGED 50 YEARS OCC VYSHNAVI EMPLOYEE, apartments NO.401 VARALAKSHMIPURAM COLONY VILLAGE VIJAYAWADA (RURAL), KRISHNA DISTRICT MAYFAIR KANURU AP 8, REDDEM SURESH KUMAR, SO SRIRAMARAO, AGED 49 YEARS R/O.D,N0.24-46-4 SAMANTHA NAGAR NEAR SAMANTHA NAGAR POST OFFICE VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT PRADESH GAJUWAKA, ANDHRA 9. REDDEM SITA DEVI SALADI SITADEVI RAO, W/O.VENKATA RAMANA OCCIHOUSEWIFE NAGARJUNA ROAD KAKINADA district ANDHRA D/O.SRIRAMARAO, aged 51 YEARS R/O.D.NO.70-7-2/7/4 PRIYANKA RESIDENCY SIDDARDHANAGAR, KAKINADA PRADESH 10. REDDEM SUDHA MUTHYAM D/O.REDDAM SRIRAMA HOUSEWIFE, R/O.D.NO.49-48-24/4 SANTHIPURAM NEAR MUNICIPAL PARK, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM PRADESH. PARTIES) SUDHA, W/O.LATE SURYA RAO AGED 42 YEARS NGGOS RAO OCC COLONY, AKKAYYAPALEM DISTRICT ANDHRA NOT NECESSARY (RESPONDENTS 2 TO 10 ARE ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section against ordersappellants beg to present the O s'n and decree in LA.No.636/2023 in ni 12-08-2024 on the file of the court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh, Counsel for the Appellant: 1.TURAGA SAI SURYA 3 HBKM.J & AHHS.J C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 643/2024 Between: 1.REDDEM SREERAMARAO, S/O.VENKATA SATYA UPPAYYA R/O.D.NO. 11-216, REDDAM STREET @ USTHAD STREET, NEAR GALL GANGALAMMA TEMPLE PITHAPURAM, E.G.DISTRICT, AP AGED 50 YEARS OCC. 2..REDDEM APPAJI, S/O.SRIRAMA RAO, EMPLOYEE, R/O.FLAT NO.401, VYSHNAVI MAYFAIR APARTMENTS VARALAKSHMIPURAM COLONY, KANURU VILLAGE VIJAYAWADA (RURAL), KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP 3..REDDEM SURESH KUMAR, SO.SRIRAMARAO, AGED 49 YEARS OCC. BUSINESS R/O.D.NO.24-46-4 SAMANTHA NAGAR, NEAR SAMANTHA NAGAR POST OFFICE GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 4.REDDEM SITA DEVI @ SALADI SITADEVI, W/O.VENKATA RAMANA RAO, D/O.SRIRAMARAO, AGED 51 YEARS OCC. HOUSEWIFE R/O.D.NO.70-7-2/7/4 PRIYANKA RESIDENCY, NAGARJUNA ROAD SIDDARDHANAGAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 5.REDDEM SUDHA @ MUTHYAM SUDHA, W/O.LATE SURYA RAO D/0.REDDAM SRIRAMA RAO, AGED 42 YEARS OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O.D.NO.49-48-24/4 NGGOS COLONY, SANTHIPURAM NEAR MUNICIPAL PARK, AKKAYYAPALEM VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. VISAKHAPATNAM, ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1.BONDADA SUBBA LAKSHMI, W/O.B.NARAYANA RAO AGED 65 HOUSEWIFE R/O.D.NO.9-130, OCC. YEARS, SATYANARAYANAPURAM OPP.MDO OFFICE, RAMANAYYAPETA KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, AP 4 hbkm,j&ahhs,j C M A Nos. 710 & 643 of 2024 2.REDDEM BRAHMMAJI RAO, S/0.VENKATA SATYA UPPAYYA R/O.D.NO.9-130, SATYANARAYANAPURAM OPP.MDO OFFICE ROAD, RAMANAYYAPETA KAKINADA, KAKINADADISTRICT, AP 3.SUNKARA VARALAKSHMI, D/O.MUMMIDI VENKAYAMMA STREET W/O.GANAPATHI APPA R/O.D.NO. 1-17-1/2, SUNKAVARI KONDAYYAPALEM, KAKINADA, KAKINADA RAO DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 4.YERRAMPATI USHARANI, W/O.NAGENDRA VENKAYAMMA, “ GODAVARI DISTRICT, AP RAO D/O.MUMMIDI EAST R/O.D.NO.3-8-5, CHINEMA ROAD, TUNI 5.PANDRANGI PADMA, W/O.APPA RAO VENKAYAMMA R/O.D.NO.3-22-56, CINEMA GODAVARI DISTRICT, AP D/O.MUMMIDI ROAD TUNI, EAST 6.ARUDRA INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI NOOKALA SURESHY NEAR CHEKKALAMEDA, RAJUPETA MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section against ordersbeg to present the above appeal questioning the order and decree O.S.No.12/2023 dt. 12-08-2024 in I.A.No.636/2023 in on the file of the court of the XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh, Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1.YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI 2.BALAJI ME DAMALL I 5 / . HBKM.J & AHHS.J C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. These Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 arises against the order passed in I.A.No.636 of 2023 in O.S.No.12 of 2023 on the file of XII Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, dated 12.08.2024, granting temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff therein against the respondents therein, restraining them from alienating the plaint schedule properties in any manner, pending disposal of the suit. 3. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent Nos.1, 7 to 10/defendant No.1, 7 to 10 filed C.M.A.No.643 of 2024 and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for these appellants submits that these appellants/defendants entered into a development agreement with the 6^^ defendant and gave the subject suit property for development to make plots in a layout approved by Kakinada Urban Development Authority (KUDA). The said appellants filed additional affidavit in C.M.A.No.643 of 2024 stating as under: 4. I submit that pursuant to the Development Agreement-cum- GPA dt. 15-02-2023, the respondent has filled and leveled the land suitable for development of plots, secured permission for conversion, prepared the layout and presented for approval by the Kakinada Urban Development Authority. After complying the necessary formalities the KUDA approved the layout vide L.P.No.28/2023/1063/KUDA dt.02-11-2023 in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.10.57 cents in R.S.No.93, 101, 102, 104, 6 HBKM,J &AHHS,j C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 209 and 210 of Pithapuram Village and Mandal, Kakinada District which Is Item no. 1 and 3 of the plaint schedule. 5. I submit that as per the approved layout the following are the details: A Total Layout Area (Ac. 10.57 cts) 51,162.36 Sq. Yards 5,169.59 Sq. Yards B Open Space (10%) C Amenities (2%) D Utility (0.5%) 1026.08 Sq. Yards E Roads Area (34.68%) 18,494.51 Sq. Yards F Net Area (Ac. 5.54 cents) 26,847.74 Sq. Yards G Mortgage Area (15%) 4,206.18 Sq. Yards H Road Widening Area (0.096%) 465.83 Sq. Yards 6. I submit that the net area after deducting the required facilities is Ac.5.59 cents I.e., 26,847.74 Sq. Yards consisting of total 145 Plots. I further submit that the developer has mortgaged 4,206.18 Sq. Yards consisting of 24 Plots. The developer has already sold 28 plots to various customers. 7. I submit that as per the development agreement dt. 15-02-2023 we are entitled for 50% and the Developer/6 respondent is entitled for 50%. I submit that the plaintiff is claiming 1/4^^ share out of suit schedule property. The property covered under the development agreement Is Item No. 1 and 3 th of the plaint schedule i.e. Ac. 10.57 cents. Item No. 2 of the plaint schedule is not in our hands. We are in possession of Item No. 4 and 5 of the plaint schedule and we undertake not to alienate the same. As per the claim in the suit, the plaintiff is entitled for 1/4^'^ share, I therefore her claim in item no. 1 and 3 would be 1/4^^ out of Ac.10.57 cents Ac.2.65 cents, i.e. 6,336 Sq. Yards. We undertake not to alienate 3,142.83 Sq. Yards from and out of 17 plots in the prime layout area to protect the interest of the 7 HBKM.J & AHHS,J C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 plaintiff subject to the result of the suit. As already stated 4206.18 Sq. Yards Is already under mortgage and have given an undertaking that we will not alienate item no.4 and 5 of the plaint schedule. We have much protected the interest of the plaintiff hy giving such an undertaking. The following are the details of the plots. 1 SI. No. Plot No. Sq. Yards Remarks 1 136 151.84 2 137 167.28 3 107 151.84 4 24 162 5 25 152.23 6 70 155.25 7 17 273.6 8 20 326.17 9 21 337.72 10 74 152.36 11 75 152.36 12 76 152.36 13 77 152.36 14 78 152.36 15 79 167.7 16 80 167.7 17 81 167.7 Total 3,142.83 4. Since the plaintiff is claiming 1/4'^ share of the plaint schedule property, her interest is protected by earmarking the plots, as tabled above and they are not going to alienate the said plots, pending the suit. 5. In the meanwhile, the other learned counsel also makes his submission on behalf of the other respondent Nos.3 to 5/defendant Nos.3 to 5 contending that their share is also to be protected in the plaint schedule 8 HBKM.J & AHHS.j C.M.A.Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 property, as it is a partition suit amongst the family members. The trial Court, while disposing of the above said lA considered the Exs.P1 to P6. The necessary proposal, which was filed in the form of additional affidavit before this Court is not placed before the trial Court in the above said lA th either by the appellants in C.M.A.No.643 of 2024 or the deveioper/6 defendant in the suit. Since all the parties, specifically, the plaintiff and the defendants who are the family members claiming the plaint schedule property in their respective shares pending development of the plots as entered by the 6*'^ defendant in an agreement with some of the defendants. their interest also has to be protected. 6. For the purpose of the same, to make a concerted effort on this issue this Court deems it fit and proper in the interest of Justice to remand the matter to the trial Court for consideration of the above said lA afresh on merits by allowing all the parties to submit their case along with their documents marked in the said lA including the additional documents, if any. and upon hearing all the parties concerned, giving due opportunity, fresh order shall be passed on the above said lA, without reference to the orders passed earlier dated 12.08.2024 on its own merits. It is made clear that we are not expressing any opinion with respect to the merits of the case and claim of the sharers of the suit schedule property. To maintain balance of convenience and in the interest of justice of all the parties concerned, status quo as on today to be maintained with respect to the plaint schedule property by all the parties concerned, pending disposal of the above said lA HtSKM^J & AHHS.J CM A Nos.710 & 643 of 2024 by the trial Court afresh, which shall be concluded as expeditiously as possible within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.643 of 2024 disposed of. In view of the orders passed in C.M.A.No.643 of 2024 further orders are necessary to be passed in C.M.A.No.710 of 2024 filed by the 6 defendant, as it holds good for both. Accordingly, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.710 of 2024 is closed. Any proposal to make an outside Court settlement, the same can also be raised before the trial Court below while hearing the matter in lA. There shall be no order as to costs. IS , no As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, I' f Additional District Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District. (With records if any) 2. One CC to Sri Turaga Sai Surya, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri G.Yaswanth, Advocate [OPUC] 1. The XII 5. One CC to Sri Balaji Medamalli, Advocate [OPUC] V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at 6. The Section Officer Amaravati. 7. The Section Officer, Appeal Filing Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati 8. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:03/07/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT CMA NOS. 710 AND 643 OF 2024 m «9 ^ Curront Section DISPOSING OF THE CMA N0.643 OF 2024 CLOSING THE CMA NO.710 OF 2024 BY REMANDING BACK THE MATTER