1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal assails the judgment and order dated 30th January 2017, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as "High Court") in A.P.O.T. No. 411 of 2016, thereby setting aside the order of the Single Judge dated 2nd November 2016, vide which an earlier interim order of the Single Judge dated 15th July 2013, directing the Appellant herein to take steps to sell the suit property but not to pass final orders on the sale, had been vacated.
3. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeal are as under:
3.1 The Appellant - Punjab & Sind Bank, was inducted as a tenant in the ground floor of premises No. 8, Old Court House Street, Kolkata, 700001, now known as 28, Hemant Basu Sarani, Kolkata, 700001 (hereinafter referred to as the "suit property") in the year 1972 by one M/s. Bharat Chamber of Commerce. In the year 2003, M/s. Bharat Chamber of Commerce preferred an ejectment suit bearing No. 2 of 2003 against the Appellant before the City Civil Court, Calcutta.
3.2 During the pendency of the aforesaid ejectment suit, the Respondent - M/s. Frontline Corporation Ltd. purchased the suit property from M/s. Bharat Chamber of Commerce, vide sale deed dated 17th February 2005. Thereafter, the Respondent availed various credit facilities from the Appellant to the tune of Rs. 42.74 crore by mortgaging, inter alia, the suit property as collateral.
3.3 Subsequently, in furtherance of the terms of a purported settlement agreement, dated 29th November 2010, filed in the aforementioned ejectment suit before the City Civil Court, Calcutta, a lease deed dated 11th February 2011 was executed between the parties, thereby demising the suit property in favour of the Appellant for a period of 21 years. It is pertinent to note that no consent decree was actually passed by the City Civil Court, Calcutta.
3.4 Owing to the financial defaults committed by the Respondent, the Appellant was constrained to classify the credit facilities availed by the Respondent as Non-Performing Assets (for short, "NPA") on 31st March 2012. Soon afterwards, a demand notice dated 13th June 2012 was also issued by the Appellant Under Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as 'SARFAESI Act') for recovery of outstanding dues of approximately Rs. 44.89 crore, with interest, from the Respondent. The demand remained unmet, and so the Appellant issued a possession notice Under Sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, declaring therein that it had taken possession of the suit property.
3.5 Aggrieved thereby, the Respondent preferred a securitization application, being S.A. No. 19 of 2013, before the learned Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Calcutta (for short, "DRT"). Simultaneously, a civil suit, being C.S. No. 217 of 2013, was also institute........