Calcutta High Court
Plg Power Ltd vs Mne Components India Private Limited on 10 September, 2025
OD-2 & 3
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
IA NO: CA/15/2025
In CP/271/2012
IN THE MATTER OF:
PLG POWER LTD
AND
MNE COMPONENTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
VS
THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND ANR.
WITH
IA NO: CA/14/2024
IN CP/271/2012
IN THE MATTER OF:
PLG POWER LTD
VS
OTO AUTOMATION S.R.I.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Date: September 10, 2025.
Appearance:
Mr. Sakya Sen, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Debrup Bhattacharjee, Adv.
Mr. Steven S. Biswas, Adv.
... for the MNE Components (I) Pvt. Ltd.
Mr. Mainak Bose, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
... for the Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd.
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mukherjee, Adv.
... for Punjab National Bank
Mr. Ranajit Chowdhury, Adv.
Mr. Sudipto Chowdhury, Adv.
Mr. Purnendu Modak, Adv.
Ms. Sampoorna Saha, Adv.
... for the Official Liquidator
2
1.
The applicant, namely, MNE Components India Private Limited, has
filed the present application being CA/15/2025 praying for acceptance
of the bid of the applicant of Rs.10 crore as highest bid in respect of
sale of assets and properties of company in liquidation and to
confirm the sale of the applicant.
2. Initially this Court has appointed a Valuer to value the property in
question and accordingly, the Valuer has submitted report dated
16th December, 2024 indicating the total value of the property as Rs.
5,74,31,247/-. The valuation report was accepted and by an order
dated 25th June, 2025 this Court has directed the Official Liquidator
to hold auction of the property on 29th July, 2025 at 10:00 am till
the completion of sale process after publication of the notice of sale.
3. In compliance with the order passed by this Court, the notice of sale
was published by the Official Liquidator on 9th July, 2025 in English
Daily Newspaper, namely, Times of India, Maharastra, Nashik
edition, in Bengali Newspaper, Sangbad Pratadin, West Bengal
edition and in Marathi newspaper at Maharastra, Nasik edition,
namely, Lokmat. After publication of the e-auction notice, two
parties have participated in the said auction process, namely,
Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd., who has quoted the bid value of Rs.
8,74,31,247/- and another Shree Karni Developers who has quoted
an amount of Rs. 8,64,31,247/-.
4. On receipt of the said bid amount, the Official Liquidator has
accepted the bid value quoted by Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd for
an amount of Rs. 8,74,31,247/- and the said firm has also
deposited 25% of the total bid value i.e. an amount of Rs.
2,18,57,812/-.
5. The Official Liquidator has submitted the report with the prayer for
confirmation of sale in favour of highest bidder. In the meantime,
the applicant appeared in the matter and informed this Court that
due to inadvertence the applicant could not participate in the tender
process but the applicant is ready to pay an amount of Rs.10 crore
as value of the said property.
6. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submits that the
applicant has also ready with the demand draft of Rs. 2,50,00,000/-
being the 25% of the value which the applicant is intending to pay
for the said property. The applicant has relied upon the judgment
in the case of Lica (P) Ltd. vs. Official Liquidator and Anr.
reported in (2000) 6 SCC 79 and Divya Manufacturing Company
(P) Ltd., Tirupati Woollen Mills Shramik Sangharsa Samity
and Anr. vs. United Bank of India and Others, Official
Liquidator and Ors. reported in (2000) 6 SCC 69 and submits
that the applicant has offered higher price than the amount quoted
by the persons who has participated in the tender/auction process
and keeping in view about the interest of the company and the
creditors and workmen, the amount quoted by the applicant be
accepted. He further submits that the amount quoted by the firm,
namely, Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd., has not been confirmed
and as such this Court has the authority to accept the amount
quoted by the applicant by taking into interest of the company as
the applicant has quoted the higher amount of Rs.10 crore than the
amount quoted by the firm namely, Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd.
7. Per Contra Learned Counsel appearing for the firm, namely,
Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd. submits that the applicant has not
shown any reason as to why this Court would ignore the amount
quoted by the firm and accept the amount quoted by the applicant.
He further submits that the applicant failed to show why the
applicant has not participated in the auction process, when the
Official Liquidator had published the auction notice in the three
newspapers. Only the applicant has given the reason in the
application that he is the adjacent plot holder of the property in
question and subsequently, when the applicant came to know that
the property in question is in auction, the applicant has offered an
amount of Rs. 10 crore.
8. Mr. Mainak Bose, Learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the firm,
namely, Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd. has relied upon by the
judgment in the case of Navalkha & Sons vs. Ramanya Das and
submits that the judgment passed in the case of LICA Private
Limited relied upon the case of Navalkha & Sons vs. Ramanya
Das & Ors. reported in (1969) 3 SCC 537. In the said case the
circumstances were totally different from the instant case. He
submits that in the case of Navalkha & Sons (supra), the Court
finds that no paper publication was made and subsequently, the
Learned Single Judge has conducted the e-auction process in Court
which the Hon'ble Division Bench as well as Supreme Court of India
deprecated the same and has not accepted the in court auction
process conducted by the Learned Single Judge.
9. Heard the Learned Counsel for the respective parties, this Court
finds that in terms of the order passed by this Court, the Official
Liquidator has published the notice of e-auction in three
newspapers i.e. in English newspaper in Maharastra, Nasik edition,
Marathi language Newspaper in Maharastra, Nasik edition and
Bengali Newspaper, in West Bengal Edition.
10. This Court finds that as per the valuation report the Valuer has
valued the property for a sum of Rs. 5,74,31,247/- but the
company, namely, M/S. Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd. has quoted
Rs. 8,74,31,247/- which is much higher than the value assessed by
the Valuer by its report dated 16th December, 2024. Now the
applicant is ready to pay Rs.10 crore which is much higher than
rate quoted by the firm, namely, Traymbkeshwar Foods Pvt. Ltd.
11. At the time of dictating this order, Mr. Samar Banerjee has
submitted that he was the earlier Valuer and he has submitted the
report wherein the property has been valued for a total sum of
Rs.12,67,03,510/- and he has also handed over the copy of the
report which he has submitted before this Court on earlier occasion.
12. Learned Counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator submits that
after the submission of valuation report dated 24 th April, 2015 there
was a theft in the company and in the said incident machineries
and plants were stolen. Thereafter a fresh valuation has been called
for by this Court and another Valuer, namely, Aloke Kumar
Ganguly, has submitted a fresh value for a sum of Rs.
5,74,31,247/-.
13. Considering the instances mentioned above, this Court finds that as
per the earlier report, the value of the property is of
Rs.12,67,03,510/- and subsequent report dated 16 th December,
2024 reveals that the valuation of the property is Rs.5,74,31,247/-.
This Court did not find any report with regard to any complaint
made by the Official Liquidator to any of the Police Authority with
regard to the theft of the machineries and plants of the said
property. The Official Liquidator has also not submitted any report
about the theft of plants and machineries of the property in
question.
14. Now, as per the new valuation report, two contenders are before this
Court. One contender who has already participated in the tender
process by quoting an amount of Rs.8,74,31,247/- and another is
the applicant who has come directly before this Court and is ready
to offer Rs.10,00,00,000/-.
15. Taking into consideration the two reports, there is a doubt in the
mind of this Court whether the report submitted by Mr. Aloke
Kumar Ganguly dated 16th December, 2024 is correct or not.
16. There is also a doubt on the act of the Office of the Official
Liquidator whether they have processed the auction process in a fair
manner.
17. Doubt is created in the mind of this Court only because when the
first Valuer has informed this Court that the earlier there was a
report of Valuer which provides the value of Rs.12,67,03,510/- but
when the second valuation was conducted and the report was filed
by the Official Liquidator, the Official Liquidator has not submitted
any report with regard to the theft of plant and machineries and also
about the earlier valuation report.
18. Considering the above, this Court is of the view that before passing
any order of confirmation of sale either in favour of applicant or in
favour of highest bidder, a report is to be called for from the Official
Liquidator or the following issues:-
i.- When the possession of the property (In Liquidation) was
taken by the Official Liquidator?
ii.- Is security personal is deputed to secure the property? If yes
since when?
iii.- When the incident of theft had occurred?
iv.- Whether any report is made to the concerned police station
with regard to the incident of theft?
v.- Whether the stolen articles have been recovered by the
police?
vi.- Whether any valuation has been taken with regard to the
stolen property?
vii.- Whether any report was filed before this Court with regard
to the incident of theft?
19. The Official Liquidator is directed to submit report within a period
of two weeks from date.
20. Let the matter appear on 24th September, 2025 at 2:00 pm.
21. The previous Valuer, namely, Samar Banerjee submits that he has
submitted his professional Service Bill amounting to Rs.2,19,569/-
to the Official Liquidator on 24th April, 2015 but till date the said fee
has not been paid to the Valuer Mr. Samar Banerjee.
22. The Official Liquidator submits that there is no fund available with
the Official Liquidator so as to enable the Official Liquidator to pay
the said amount to the Valuer.
23. The Official Liquidator is directed to forward the Bill of the Valuer,
Mr. Samar Banerjee dated 24th April, 2015 to the secured creditor
i.e. Punjab National Bank, Mumbai within a period of one week from
date and on receipt of the said Bill by the secured creditor i.e.
Punjab National Bank shall release the Bill amount of the Official
Liquidator within the period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
the said Bill from the Official Liquidator. It is made clear that the
amount if paid by the secured creditor shall be adjusted at the time
of disposal of the present case.
24. The Valuer, Mr. Samar Banerjee is also directed again to forward the
copy of the said Bill to the Official Liquidator by Monday i.e. 15th
September, 2025 with the account details so that the amount can
be transferred in the account of the Valuer.
25. The Official Liquidator submits that 20% amount submitted by
Traymbkeshwar Foods Private Limited is lying with the Railtel and
5% is lying to the Official Liquidator. Accordingly, both the
authorities are directed to invest the said amount in the interest
bearing fixed deposit for the time being till the final order is passed
in this matter.
(KRISHNA RAO, J.)
DB/Sbghosh
