Bombay High Court
Official Liquidator Of Zenith Infotech ... vs The Bank Of New York Mellon, London ... on 27 March, 2026
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR'S REPORT NO. 81 OF 2025
IN
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 28 OF 2012
Official Liquidator of Zenith Infotech Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
The Bank of New York Mellon, London Br. ...Respondent
Mr. Muttahar Khan for the Official Liquidator with Mr. Anil Bhagure,
Deputy Official Liquidator.
Ms. Cheryl Fernandes i/b AZB & Partners for the Petitioner.
Mr.M. S. Bhardwaj with Mr. Shinde. S. ADC for the .C. Seepz-
Intervenor-Applicant.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 27th MARCH, 2026 P.C. :
1. When the matter is called out, Mr. Khan, learned Counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator submits that although not recorded in the order dated 13 th March, 2026, in order to find takers for the goods (electronic items) lying in the 005, ground floor, Multi- Storey Building, SEEPZ, Andheri (East), Mumbai (the "said premises"), this Court had granted time to the Official Liquidator till today and in pursuance thereof the Official Liquidator had been approached by M/s Proaucs India to inspect the said movables lying at the said premises. Nikita Gadgil 1/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc
2. Mr. Khan submits that thereafter, pursuant to the order of the Official Liquidator dated 25th March, 2026, the representatives of the Official Liquidator visited the said premises to provide inspection to the representative of M/s Proaucs India on 25 th March, 2026 itself. At around 3.10 p.m., the representative reached gate no. 1 of SEEPZ, Andheri (E), Mumbai and met with the security officials and informed the purpose of their visit and also showed the office order issued by the Official Liquidator to one Mr. Rahul, ADC of SEEPZ, whose number was provided by Mr. Aman Kumar Sharma, ADC, who was looking at this matter earlier and requested the ADC to inform the security officials to allow the representatives of the Official Liquidator and M/s Proaucs India to enter the premises. That, thereafter, the representatives entered the SEEPZ premises. Mr. Rajendra Shinde of M/s Proaucs India entered the premises at around 3.30 p.m.
3. Mr. Khan submits that thereafter, to the surprise of the representatives of the Official Liquidator the seal and lock of the Official Liquidator were not to be found and another new lock was found at the main gate at the entry point of the said premises on the ground floor of the company in liquidation. Mr. Khan submits that, thereafter, the representatives inquired with the office boy and he Nikita Gadgil 2/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc informed that about some days back 3-4 persons came and removed the seal, lock and chain of the entry point of the said premises and entered inside the premises and that all such activities were recorded in the CCTV camera installed in front of the Room No. 005. Mr. Khan submits that, thereafter, the representatives of the Official Liquidator again called Mr. Rahul, ADC of SEEPZ to inform of this incident and to know how such an incident had occurred and also asked whether he had any idea about this incident. It is submitted that over the telephone Mr. Rahul informed that the seal and lock of the Official Liquidator was removed / broken open with the authority letter of the Joint Development Commissioner of the SEEPZ, Andheri and also requested to meet Mr. Sudarshan Shinde, ADC, SEEPZ for further information. That, thereafter, the representatives called Mr. Sudarshan Shinde and informed him about the incident and tried to gather information whether he had any idea about the incident and also requested him to come in front of the said premises of the company in liquidation. Mr. Khan submits that Mr. Sudarshan Shinde replied that he had no idea about this incident and assured that he would call the relevant person to gather the information. That after 15 minutes the Official Liquidator's representative again called him to know whether he was coming in front of the said premises or not and he said that he had Nikita Gadgil 3/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc called for the papers and requested the representative to visit his office. Mr. Khan submits that, thereafter, the Official Liquidator's representative reached in the chamber of Mr. Sudarshan Shinde, ADC, SEEPZ and he informed that such kind of breaking open and removal of the seal and lock of the Official Liquidator was very unfortunate and without any prior intimation / approval of the Official Liquidator. Mr. Khan submits that in between the discussion, the ADC received the documents and informed that the incident of breaking open and removal of seal and lock of the Official Liquidator occurred on 17 th March, 2026 was with directions/authority of the Joint Development Commissioner of SEEPZ, Andheri and the entire incident had been recorded in the panchanama prepared on that date.
4. Mr. Khan submits that the representatives informed that they would submit their minutes / report to the Official Liquidator recording the incident for further directions. Mr. Khan submits that in view thereof the representatives of the Official Liquidator could not provide inspection to the representatives of the intending purchaser of M/s Proaucs India pursuant to the order.
5. Mr. Khan submits that the Official Liquidator's office has prepared minutes / report dated 25th March, 2026 with respect to the Nikita Gadgil 4/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc said incident and tenders across the bar the said minutes / report. Referring to the said report, Mr. Khan draws this Court's attention to the photographs at Annexure-A, which contain the lock without a seal and compares the same with the two photographs at previous photos 1 and 2, which contained lock with seal in support of his contentions. A perusal of the same clearly suggests that the seal and lock of the Official Liquidator has been removed.
6. Mr. Bharadwaj, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant in the Interim Application viz. for the Development Commissioner, SEEPZ, at the outset apologizes for the said removal of the seal and lock of the Official Liquidator without prior intimation / approval of the Official Liquidator, submitting that the same has happened due to miscommunication between the legal cell and the estate department and seeks to tender across the panchanama dated 17 th March, 2026 on behalf of the Development Commissioner.
7. A perusal of the said panchanama indicates that an authorisation dated 16th March, 2026 was issued by the DDC / Estate Officer, SEEPZ- SEZ for breaking open the lock of unit no. 005 viz. the said premises and for preparing an inventory of the materials lying inside. The panchanama records that the main entry of the said unit in premises Nikita Gadgil 5/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc no. 005 was find locked with a shutter and glass door. That the said lock was cut open in front of the panchas along with the officers. Upon entering, the said officials started preparing the inventory of the materials kept inside the said premises, inventorised the items as evidenced in Annexure-A to the panchanama and put their signatures on the said annexures. That during the proceedings of the panchanama caretakers took photographs of the said premises which have been attached to the panchanama. It has been recorded that the panchanama started at 12.43 p.m. on 17 th March, 2026 and concluded at 5.50 p.m. on the same day and at the same place without any untoward incident and was conducted in peaceful and systematic manner with no damage to any movable and immovable property as well as the materials kept inside the said premises. That nothing was taken over by the said officers.
8. From the panchanama it is clear that after the passing of the order dated 13th March, 2026 an authorisation dated 16th March, 2026 to the break open the lock to unit number 005 viz. the said premises under the possession of the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay was issued and thereafter, the cutting of the lock was carried out without any prior intimation to the Official Liquidator, High Court Nikita Gadgil 6/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc Bombay or the permission of the Official Liquidator of the High Court, Bombay or without any leave of this Court.
9. Mr. Khan has also drawn this Court's attention to the order dated 29th April, 2025 of a coordinate Bench of this Court in the Application filed on behalf of the SEEPZ, submitting that no order has been passed in favour of the Development Commissioner or the SEEPZ to break open the said premises and to inventorise the articles / movables therein. Mr. Khan has drawn this Court's attention to paragraph 3 of the said order and submits that this Court was clearly of the opinion that instead of the movables being temporarily shifted to the rented premises,it would be appropriate that immediate steps are taken for valuation and disposal of the movables, so that the said premises can be handed over to the Applicant-SEEPZ.
10. Drawing this Court's attention to paragraph-4 of this order, Mr. Khan submits that in view thereof this Court had permitted the Official Liquidator to appoint a valuer from its panel to prepare a valuation report in respect of the movables lying in the said premises and thereafter, permitted the Official Liquidator to move an appropriate report seeking directions for disposal of the movables, so that the said premises could be vacated at the earliest for being handed over to the Nikita Gadgil 7/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc Applicant-SEEPZ.
11. Mr. Khan submits that the valuation exercise was carried out and also the terms and conditions of the sale approved by this Court on 23 rd June, 2025 and permission for sale by e-auction granted. Mr. Khan submits that since no bids were received, the Official Liquidator's Report No. 81 of 2025 was moved before this Court seeking various directions including a directions to conduct a fresh valuation and if that was not permitted to make one more attempt to sell the movables/assets at the said premises on "as is, where is, whatever in there is basis", through e-auction based on the revised reserved price as deemed fit and proper by this Court.
12. Mr. Khan submits that after hearing the parties on 13 th March, 2026, as submitted earlier, this Court had granted time of two weeks to the Official Liquidator to identify and get intending purchaser to inspect the said movables at the said premises and the same was agreed to by Mr. Bharadwaj, learned Counsel appearing for the Development Commissioner, SEEPZ.
13. A perusal of the order dated 13th March, 2026 itself indicates that Mr. Bharadwaj had in fact agreed that the matter be stood over to 27 th March, 2026, which is today.
Nikita Gadgil 8/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc
14. Very curiously, therefore, between 13 th March, 2026 and today by an authorisation dated 16th March, 2026, on 17th March, 2026 the seal and the lock of the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay has been cut and the items inventorised as noted in the panchanama tendered across the bar by Mr. Bharadwaj. In my view, the authorisation as well as cutting of the lock, in other words, breaking of the seal and lock is illegal and is a contempt in the face of the Court which needs to be dealt with severly with consequences under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. But before doing that considering the seriousness of the matter, this Court is of the view that the assistance of the learned Additional Solicitor General of India be requested for.
15. Accordingly, let the Additional Solicitor General of India address this Court in the matter on the next date on behalf of the Development Commissioner SEEPZ before this Court passes any orders.
16. Let the Development Commissioner SEEPZ, Mumbai also personally remain present in the Court on the next date.
17. In the meanwhile, the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay is directed to by 5.00 p.m. Sunday viz. 29 th March, 2026 place a lock and seal to the said premises no. 005, ground floor, Multi-Storey Building, Nikita Gadgil 9/10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::
45. OLR 81-25 in CP 28-12.doc SEEPZ, Andheri (East), Mumbai, in the personal presence of the Development Commissioner and not in the presence of any authorised representative and to inventorise the movables / articles lying therein and place a report before this Court on the next date.
18. List on 30th March, 2026 First on Board.
19. Until further orders, neither the Development Commissioner nor any of his officials or sub-ordinates to in any manner whatsoever deal with or enter into in the said premises or in any manner interfere or obstruct with the Official Liquidator's possession of the said premises.
Digitally
signed by
NIKITA (ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
NIKITA YOGESH
YOGESH GADGIL
GADGIL Date:
2026.03.27
23:46:27
+0530
Nikita Gadgil 10/10
::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2026 03:09:23 :::