Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Enbee Plantation Ltd. vs Utkarsh Agrawal on 1 April, 2026
1 COMP-3-2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
COMP No. 3 of 2003
(M/S ENBEE PLANTATION LTD. Vs UTKARSH AGRAWAL )
Dated : 01-04-2026
Shri Hare Krishana Upadhyay - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vivek Khedkar - Senior Advocate through V.C. with Shri Naveen
Dubey (int) - Advocate for intervenor Ajay Kumar Jain.
Shri Abhinav Sunil Kherdikar - Advocate for the respondent No.1-3.
Shri Viraaj Shanker Jha and Shri Vasu Jain - Advocates for MPSIDC. Shri D.K. Mishra - Advocate for the respondent No.3. Shri Sandeep K Agrawal - Advocate for the respondent (intervenor) Smt. Gulab K. Patel - Advocate for the respondent. Shri L.G.S. Baghel - Advocate for the respondent . Shri Shubhank Kumar Saraf - Advocate for the respondent. Shri Praveen Chourasiya - Advocate for the respondent.
Shri Viraj Shankar Jha, counsel for the MPSIDC prays for and is granted two weeks' time to file reply on behalf of MPSIDC.
It is made clear that no further time shall be granted to MPSIDC for filing reply.
Heard on I.A. No.7067 of 2026 filed by the intervenor Ajay Kumar Jain and his nominee M/s Spartan Properties Private Limited seeking directions in continuation to to order dated 18.03.2026 passed by this Court in the matter of execution of sale deed in favour of the nominee. Now by this application prayer is made to this Court that before execution of sale deed Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Signing time: 4/4/2026 12:21:26 PM 2 COMP-3-2003 some issues have arisen regarding the outstanding dues of the society in which the property in question is situated in lot No.2, which was subject matter of adjudication of this Court on 18.03.2026. It is prayed by way of the said I.A. that official liquidator be directed to deposit remaining outstanding amount reflected in column No.4 of the chart showing the details of payment and thereafter to direct OL to issue letter to the Sub Registrar and execute sale deed in time bound manner and to direct the OL to deposit the difference of amount and refund the remaining amount to the intervener.
The property in lot No.2 is a office premises situated at Poonam Chambers, 2nd Floor, A-Wing, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai and the society wherein the property is situated, i.e. Poonam Chambers premises Cooperative Society Limited "A Wing" has issued a demand notice dated 21.11.2025 mentioning the outstanding amount in two different spells, i.e. the entire outstanding period from 01.06.2006 to 31.08.2025, which is Rs.35,49,588/- including the principal amount as well as the interest and the amount from 01.09.2025 till 31.12.2025, which is Rs.33,791/- total amount of Rs.35,83,379/-. Out of the aforesaid Rs.16,34,349/- is the principal amount and Rs.19,49,030/- is the total outstanding interest.
Learned counsel for the petitioner for the intervener had argued that in view of judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Official Liquidator vs. Ujjain Nagar Palika Nigam & others (2023) 7 SCR 1082, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that liability on account of property tax and water tax claimed by the concerned authority, which is a post-liquidation liability, is obligatory upon the OL to discharge in view of Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Signing time: 4/4/2026 12:21:26 PM 3 COMP-3-2003 operation of Companies Court Rules, 1959. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under :-
"27. This being the position, in our view, the Company Court and then the Division Bench of the High Court have rightly underscored the faults on the part of the appellant OL and have rightly held that the liability on account of the property tax and water tax claimed by the respondent No. 1 to the extent rejected by the appellant OL has been a post-liquidation liability, which the OL was obliged to discharge, in view of omission in the sale notice and then, in view of the operation of Rule 338 of the Rules of 1959.
28. Put in different words, as regards the operation of the said Rule 338 of the Rules of 1959, we are inclined to accept the reasoning of the High Court that on the facts and in the circumstances of the present case, arrears of property tax and water tax until the date of confirmation of sale, i.e., 04.07.2003, would qualify as the expenses for "preserving, realising or getting in" the assets of the company and thus, shall have to be paid in priority by the appellant OL."
Learned counsel for the official liquidator submitted that even as per the aforesaid judgement the liability would fall on the official liquidator only for the period from 11.08.2015, which is the date of winding up order till 02.04.2025 which is the date of handing over possession and the liabilities in that period would only be Rs.13,58,727/- and the period after 02.04.2025 has to be borne by the auction purchaser/bidder and the period prior to 11.08.2025 would be claimable from the company in liquidation and the concerned society may claim the said amount by moving its claim to the official liquidator or filing appropriate application to the Court, or the intervener may pay the said amount.
This Court is in complete agreement with the aforesaid assertions made by learned counsel for the OL, because the OL can only be saddled with liability for the period from the date of liquidation till the date of Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Signing time: 4/4/2026 12:21:26 PM 4 COMP-3-2003 handing over possession and the expenses only for that period would be expenses for preserving, realising or getting in the assets of the company and the dues prior to the said date can be claimed by the society from the official liquidator like a creditor and the dues after 02.04.2025 are the responsibility of the auction purchaser.
Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the intervener/successful bidder to deposit the remaining amount before the official liquidator and the official liquidator would contribute only Rs.12,48,517/- and no other amount, and the entire amount shall be sent to the concerned society by the official liquidator and after issuance of NOC from the concerned society, the necessary proceedings for execution of sale deed shall be carried out by the official liquidator.
After deposit of the amount, the OL shall proceed for execution of registered instrument in favour of nominee of the bidder.
In the above terms, I.A. No.7067 of 2026 is disposed of. List after two weeks.
(VIVEK JAIN) JUDGE rj Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Signing time: 4/4/2026 12:21:26 PM