Muthoot Finance share price rises 4%: Approves interim dividend of ₹26 per share
Stock Market Today: Muthoot Finance share price gained more than 4% during the intraday trade on Monday, April 21, after the company's board approved an interim dividend of ₹ 26 per share. It also recommended an increase in the borrowing powers of the Board of Directors for an amount up to ₹ 2 lakh crore.
Muthoot Finance announced the outcome of its Board meeting held on Monday, April 21, 2025, regarding the approval of the interim dividend. As per the release, the Directors have considered and approved the payment of an interim dividend of ₹ 26 (Rupees Twenty Six) per equity share of face value of ₹ 10 each (260%) for the financial year 2024-25 (FY25).
The record date for identifying shareholders to receive the dividend stands as April 25, 2025. The shareholders who had bought shares of Muthoot Finance a day prior to the record date will see their names appear in the list of eligible shareholders to receive the dividend.
The interim dividend will be paid to the shareholders within 30 days from the date of declaration of the dividend, highlighted Muthoot Finance.
The Board of Muthoot Finance also recommended the appointment of George Joseph as an Independent Director of the company. This proposal is awaiting approval by the shareholders.
Further, the Board also recommended, for the approval of the shareholders, an increase in the borrowing powers of the Board of Directors under Section 180 (1) (c) of the Companies Act, 2013 for an amount up to ₹ 2 lakh crore.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
Exalogic affairs: CM Pinarayi Vijayan's daughter seeks quashing of plea for CBI probe
Kochi: T Veena, director of Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd and daughter of chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan , has filed a counter-affidavit in the high court opposing the petition seeking a CBI probe into the financial transactions between her company and Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL), terming it an attempt to vilify her solely on account of her parentage. The PIL was filed by senior journalist M R Ajayan, alleging that Exalogic received Rs 1.72 crore from CMRL as illegal gratification. He also sought an investigation into the alleged political nexus involving the CM and the companies concerned. In her counter-affidavit, Veena submitted that the petition is aimed at casting suspicion on her professional endeavours merely because she is the CM's daughter. She pointed out that the ministry of corporate affairs has already directed the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) to investigate certain affairs of CMRL, including transactions involving Exalogic, and that under the Companies Act, parallel investigations by other agencies, including the CBI, are barred in such matters. She contended that the petition lacks specific details or verifiable evidence, rendering it legally unsustainable and indicative of a fishing and roving enquiry. Two vigilance courts had earlier dismissed similar allegations, and those orders were later upheld by high court. Denying the allegation that Exalogic Solutions is a 'benami company,' Veena stressed that her father had no role in the company, which was founded in 2014, two years before he assumed office as CM and the petition is merely political mudslinging in the guise of public interest. She also described as speculative and inflammatory the petitioner's claim that the AKG Centre was used as a 'safe deposit place,' asserting that no factual basis or evidence was provided. She clarified that during the Covid-19 pandemic, the company's registered office in Bengaluru had been closed, and the AKG Centre address in Thiruvananthapuram was accordingly updated with the Registrar of Companies later. CM Vijayan had earlier also filed a similar counter-affidavit in the case. HC is scheduled to consider the matter on June 17.
Mint
11 hours ago
- Mint
Reform push: Insurance amendment bill heads to Parliament; changes to IBC, Companies Act will have to wait
NEW DELHI : The Insurance Laws (Amendment) Bill, proposing sweeping reforms such as 100% foreign direct investment (FDI) and composite licensing, is likely to be tabled in the Monsoon Session of Parliament in July, three people aware of the plan said. However, amendments to clarify the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, and changes to the Companies Act, 2023, are unlikely to make it to the coming session, the people said on the condition of anonymity. The Centre is also awaiting a Parliament select committee's views on the new Income Tax Bill, 2025, meant to simplify direct tax laws, expected in July, so that it can be introduced in the Winter Session of Parliament towards the end of November or early December, said one of the three people quoted above. The select committee, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP's) Baijayant Panda, is expected to give its report on the first day of the monsoon session, likely to begin on 21 July. Insurance reforms The insurance amendment bill was slated for introduction in the Budget session, but got delayed as the finance ministry sought to add provisions on 100% FDI and the ease of operational considerations for foreign investors, requiring fresh vetting by the law ministry before cabinet approval. 'Several provisions of the bill required time for regulatory and industry readiness. It has now been finalized," the second person said, adding that the cabinet approval could come soon. The bill focuses on ensuring clarity and preparedness, said the third person. It will revise three key legislations—the Insurance Act, 1938, Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) Act, 1956, and the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) Act, 1999—paving the way for greater autonomy for the insurance regulator and the LIC for appointments, office setup, and staffing. The comprehensive legislative structure will eliminate the need for future amendments to the LIC Act and related laws to enable composite licensing. Also read | To curb mis-selling, finance ministry tells lenders to stop incentives on insurance The bill proposes composite insurance licences with a higher capital threshold of ₹150 crore while retaining existing capital norms for insurance and reinsurance at ₹100 crore and ₹200 crore, respectively. A composite licence, already allowed in Singapore, Malaysia, and the UK, will allow a single insurer to offer both life and non-life products, currently permitted only through separate entities. Besides allowing 100% FDI, the bill simplifies operating conditions for foreign reinsurers by slashing the net-owned fund requirement from ₹5,000 crore to ₹1,000 crore. Queries emailed to spokespersons for the ministry of finance and corporate affairs on Tuesday remained unanswered. Experts believe the bill will deepen insurers' reach in underserved rural and semi-urban areas, making insurance more accessible with tailored, affordable products. It will also enhance firms' risk management capacity, speed up tech adoption, and grow their customer base, leading to a strong foundation for long-term sectoral growth. However, some industry executives have their reservations. Also read | The health insurance puzzle: 83% Indians aware but only 19% covered 'The reforms are well-intentioned. Well thought-out? Perhaps not. A 100% FDI for insurers will be welcome, but how many will bite remains to be seen. Even now, many foreign partners in joint ventures have not touched the current permissible 74%," said Balasundaram, secretary general, Insurance Brokers Association of India. 'As for composite licences, it is an uncharted area in India, and the outcomes are not easy to predict. Capital for serious insurers has never been an issue; so, the lowering of the minimum requirement does not really add value," he added. He said ease of operations for foreign entities sounds good on paper, but implementation and market conditions will decide whether it will work or not. In short, outcomes remain an act of crystal gazing as of now. Since 2000, when the insurance sector was opened to private players by gradually raising FDI limits from 26% to 74%, it has seen robust growth. Between 2014 and January 2024, while the number of insurers rose from 53 to 70, insurance penetration grew from 3.9% to 4%, and insurance density nearly doubled from $52 to $92. A flat 4% insurance penetration against the global average of 7% "means that while the insurance sector has expanded, the expansion has been in line with the broader economy and has not really outpaced it, which you would expect a sunrise sector to", said Narendra Ganpule, partner and national financial services advisory leader, professional services firm Grant Thornton Bharat. 'The need of the hour is revolutionary changes, which is what the bill attempts to bring about to propel India to achieve its espoused vision of 'Insurance for all by 2047'," he added. Also read | Heath insurance in India ought to cover preventive care as well Pavanjit Singh Dhingra, joint managing director, Prudent Insurance Brokers, echoed his views, saying the proposed changes will help attract the required capital, greater focus, and a wider distribution network, all of which are critical to deepening insurance penetration, especially in underserved and rural markets. The draft bill also empowers the insurance regulator to set relaxed licensing and capital requirements for smaller insurers or single-product entities, replacing the fixed capital clause with a more flexible, consultative framework. It introduces a differential licensing regime to support micro and niche insurers—with a minimum capital of ₹50 crore on a case-by-case basis—in serving low-income and rural populations. It also paves the way for captive insurers, allowing conglomerates to establish in-house insurers to manage group-level risks. In an earlier conference, M. Nagaraju, financial services secretary, had said the new insurance laws would attract global investors, foster competition, enhance product quality, improve customer service, and lower premiums, bringing India on par with economies like Canada, Brazil, Australia, and China. But C.R. Vijayan, former secretary general of the General Insurance Council, a representative body of general insurers, said though the reform measures signal a liberal investment climate, investors will judge it by the sector's long-term returns over a decade or more. 'Long-term returns entail higher risk for investors, especially given the potential impact of a change in government and its implications on investment policies." Corporate reforms While the IBC amendments under discussion mainly seek to clarify legislative provisions in light of certain judicial pronouncements and to make the law more efficient, the proposed Companies Act amendments are based on an expert committee's suggestions for modifying the regulatory framework for statutory auditors and improving the ease of doing business. Bankruptcy law experts said that while further legislative streamlining of the IBC is awaited, all stakeholders should strive for timely decision-making and ensure the sanctity of the debt resolution process. Also read | Indian insurtech startups look overseas as AI reshapes global insurance 'The stakeholders need to develop and follow the right practices in insolvency resolution processes. The regulatory authorities should honour the IBC principles and should not leverage their position as a regulator to recover the dues during the moratorium period," said Anoop Rawat, partner (Insolvency and Bankruptcy) at law firm Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co.
The Hindu
15 hours ago
- The Hindu
Kerala CM's daughter T. Veena denies allegations in CMRL case, terms PIL a bid to ‘vilify' her
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's daughter T. Veena has refuted the allegation that Exalogic Solutions Private Limited, a company run by her, is a benami firm, saying that it is operated independently of her father. She made the statement in an affidavit filed before the Kerala High Court in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a CBI probe into the allegations regarding the financial transactions between the Exalogic and the Kochi-based private minerals firm Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL). She pointed out that the company was founded and managed by her and at all times operated independently of her father. He had no role in the business of the company, financial or otherwise. In fact, she founded the company in 2014 whereas her father assumed office of Chief Minister in May 2016. Refutes Kovalam palace charges She also said that she had no role in any decision , communication or transaction relating to the Kovalam palace. The allegation that she had exercised undue influence in the transfer of the Kovalam palace and that she was a conduit for 'unjust enrichment' is baseless and without any material. The allegations are 'ex-facie malicious , defamatory, and disparaging' of a woman professional. It is nothing but political mudslinging disguised as a public litigation, she said. Ms. Veena also said that the allegation that her husband and Minister for Public Works P.A. Mohamed Riyas' disclosure of income in his income affidavit was inconsistent with the firm's revenue is misconceived and misleading. Personal income, company turnover, and tax disclosures are governed by different standards. Any alleged discrepancy can only be addressed by the competent authority under the law. Besides, her husband was not a shareholder, director or beneficiary of Exalogic. He had had no connection with its business or operations at any point of time, according to the affidavit. 'A disguised attempt ' She said the PIL is 'a disguised attempt to vilify' her because of her identity as daughter of the Chief Minister. According to her, the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs had ordered a probe by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) into certain affairs of CMRL, including the transactions with Exalogic under Section 212 (1)(c)of the Companies Act. As the SFIO is currently seized of the matter, all other agencies are precluded from probing it. The provisions of the Companies Act barred a parallel or overlapping investigation by any other agency into it. Besides, the very allegations forming the basis of the PIL were brought up before various Vigilance courts which had dismissed such complaints. Even the High Court had upheld the dismissals of such complaints and observed that the statements made by an authorised officer before the interim board for settlement – which was inadmissible under Section 4 of the Evidence Act and cannot be treated as judicial facts – cannot be the basis for setting criminal proceedings into motion, the affidavit pointed out.
