I now understand you better vibhore. For such reservoir permeability I also agree that the maximum Pc reached in the test is questionable. Ask the laboratory directly.

As for the other questions here are my comments:

Does porous-plate data is also converted to reservoir condition?
- Yes. Even though oil-water system is used in the test, interfacial tension changes from 48dynes/cm at lab conditions to aprox. 30 dynes/cm at average reservoir conditions. Take into account that air-water systems are also used to conduct this test (make proper corrections to reservoir conditions).

While calculating a J-function does both data (MICP and porous plate) should be considered?
- Yes, although in my opinion (shared by other colleagues of mine), the porous plate test yields results that are more representative of the reservoir physics, then, if there are enough porous plate tests (or centrifuge tests) to characterize all the rock types (or flow units, or whatever is your method of rock characterization) the MICP test are conveniently disregarded when it comes to calculate the J-function. However, needless to say the importance of MICP test to estimate the pore size distribution, r35, etc.

In-case of porous plate the Lab has only reported Kair (air permeability) but in case of MICP klinkenberg permeability is reported.
- Make standard corrections to make both perm measurements comparable.