# In the matter of Nalinesh Kumar Paurush vs. Arvind Mittal, RP of Temple Leasing and Finance Limited

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-09-25. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00502. The appeal was filed by members of the Suspended Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 25 Sept 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00502
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/nalinesh-kumar-paurush-vs-arvind-mittal-rp-of-temple-leasing-and-finance-limited-09a381be

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed by members of the Suspended Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor (CD) against an order dated 09.05.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Delhi Bench. The NCLT order designated certain transactions by the appellants as fraudulent and directed them to contribute Rs. 28 lakhs to the liquidation estate of the CD.

## Facts

The NCLT directed the appellants to contribute Rs. 28 lakhs to the liquidation estate of the CD, deeming certain transactions as fraudulent.

The appellants purchased shares of Uno Industries Limited and Jayant Mercantile Company Limited.

The Respondent liquidator filed an application under Section 66 of the IBC alleging fraudulent transactions.

The appellants argued that they exercised due diligence and believed the share prices would increase.

The respondent argued that the appellants did not exercise due diligence and disregarded RBI and SEBI regulations.

The shares purchased were not actively traded at the time of purchase.

The liquidator was deleted from the array of parties and Shree Vishvamurte TradInvest Pvt. Ltd. was impleaded as Respondent.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the transactions were …

**Ratio:** A transaction may only be termed as fraudulent if it has been carried on with the

…

**Reasoning:** The appellate tribunal found that the NCLT did not correctly appreciate the facts of the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 66 requires a high standard of proof to establish fraudulent intent and

…

**Application:** The tribunal found that the main ingredients of Section 66(2) of the IBC were

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Mohd. Faiz Alam…; Arun Ba…
- **Appellants:** Nalinesh Kumar…; Prince Kumar…; +1 more
- **Respondents:** TEMPLE LEASING &…; Arvind M…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Novelty Buildwell…; Prominent…; +3 more
- **Advocates:** Adit S P…; Avinash…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **09.05.2023 — Order by…**: Order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Delhi Bench, designating certain…
- **25.06.2021 — CIRP Commen…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was started against Temple Leasing and…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 66 — Fraudulent trading or wrongful trading](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-66)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/nalinesh-kumar-paurush-vs-arvind-mittal-rp-of-temple-leasing-and-finance-limited-09a381be