Latest news with #OCs
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Puravankara posts ₹68.55 crore net loss in Q1FY26, revenue down 20%
Bengaluru-headquartered realtor Puravankara reported a net loss of Rs 68.55 crore in the first quarter of the financial year 2026 ended 30 June, as compared to a net profit of Rs 14.78 crore in the same quarter the previous year, on the back of a dip in handovers and sales due to regulatory changes. 'Our handovers and sales were less than our expectations due to regulatory changes, including e-Khata and changes in byelaws. However, our team is confident of achieving the scheduled handover and launches,' said Ashish Puravankara, Managing Director, Puravankara. Further, the company's revenue from operations narrowed to Rs 524.4 crore, down 20.3 per cent in the quarter. On a sequential basis, revenue was down 4.44 per cent. In Q1FY26, the company recorded sales of Rs 1,124 crore, up 6 per cent year-on-year, on sales volume of 1.25 million square feet. The average realisation rose 9 per cent to Rs 8,988 per square foot, while collections stood at Rs 857 crore. Additionally, the weighted average cost of debt reduced to 11.35 per cent as compared to the previous quarter. Net debt stood at Rs 2,825 crore, with a net debt-to-equity ratio of 1.68 in Q1FY26. The company said that the total estimated surplus from all completed and ongoing projects stands at Rs 7,915 crore. Of this, commercial projects contribute Rs 1,934 crore, while pipeline projects are expected to generate Rs 5,578 crore. The overall estimated surplus across all categories exceeds Rs 15,427 crore. Puravankara noted that while regulatory changes, including the e-Khata process, have impacted handover and revenue recognition timelines, it remains on track to deliver over 4,500 units during the financial year. Of the planned handovers, 3.65 million square feet (3,015 units) have been completed and Occupancy Certificates (OCs) received, and are currently pending e-Khata issuance for final possession handover. In Q1FY26, the company handed over 667 units covering 0.68 million square feet, generating revenue of Rs 539 crore. As of 30 June, Puravankara has completed 92 projects measuring approximately 54 million square feet across nine cities, including Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad, Coimbatore, Mangaluru, Kochi, Mumbai, Pune and Goa. The company's total land bank is approximately 30 million square feet and ongoing projects add up to 35.75 million square feet. Puravankara announced its earnings after market hours on Friday. At the time of the close, the company's shares were trading at Rs 266.5 apiece, up 0.95 per cent, on the BSE.
New Indian Express
11-07-2025
- General
- New Indian Express
GHMC collects crores, has no means to monitor RWHS pits
HYDERABAD: The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) has collected Rs 21.2 crore in the last five years as Rainwater Harvesting Structure (RWHS) charges from property owners seeking building permissions, yet nearly 40% of buildings above 200 square metres lack the mandatory RWHS pits. GHMC also collects development charges, labour cess, environmental impact fees, and open space contribution charges for building permissions. The GHMC mandates that owners construct RWHS at their own expense but offers no technical assistance and has no follow-up mechanism in place to ensure compliance or maintenance. In the last five years, the GHMC has approved 7,210 building permissions and issued 23,239 RWHS permissions. While the collected funds are intended to build pits in public spaces, both officials and surveys admit that many of these structures have become defunct due to poor upkeep. A survey conducted by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSSB) on RWHS pits in buildings with an area above 300 square metres found that 40 per cent of the buildings lacked mandatory RWHS pits but were still given Occupancy Certificates (OCs). Even among the 60 per cent that had soak pits, many have become defunct due to lack of maintenance. The GHMC has admitted that it has no mechanism to check regular maintenance. Of the 42,784 surveyed premises, 22,825 were found to have RWHS, while 17,385 lacked them. Notices were issued to 16,190 owners to construct the RWHS. The HMWSSB has urged GHMC to ensure strict compliance with the rules before issuing Occupancy Certificates for any buildings above 200 square metres, as per the WALTA Act. It must check whether the owners have constructed RWHS pits; if not, their OC applications should be rejected.
Time of India
28-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
MahaRERA starts statewide verification of developer-submitted OCs; Only 136 of 2,600 verified so far
Pune: The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has initiated a statewide verification of 2,600 Occupancy Certificates (OCs) submitted by developers on its official portal. These certificates have been sent to respective planning authorities to ensure authenticity and prevent discrepancies or forgery, officials said on Saturday. The move follows the fallout of the Dombivli scam, where developers used fake approvals for illegal constructions across multiple projects. The crackdown stems from the 2022 Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation (KDMC) scam, in which 65 illegal buildings were constructed using forged documents, including fake 7/12 extracts (land records), fabricated building plans, and counterfeit MahaRERA registrations. The scam led to the arrest of 15 individuals, including developers and agents, and a Bombay High Court-ordered demolition drive that displaced over 6,500 residents. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai "Many developers have uploaded Occupancy Certificates on the MahaRERA portal. We are verifying them with the respective planning authorities," a senior MahaRERA official said. The OC serves as the completion certificate for a real estate project. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why Florida Loves This Charcuterie Platter [See] SOLYMALL Shop Now Undo As per an earlier directive by the state's Urban Development Department (UDD), verified Commencement Certificates (CCs), building plans, and OCs issued to developers must be sent by planning authorities to MahaRERA's designated email if their websites are not integrated. While many authorities have submitted CCs and building plans, it was noted that OCs are often not uploaded by developers. So far, only 136 OCs have been verified by the authorities, with the remaining still under process. Officials said integration of local authority websites with the MahaRERA portal would have significantly expedited the process. "We've been pushing for website integration for months. Only Mumbai's municipal corporation has completed integration. Others have cited technical issues, which are now being addressed by the Maharashtra IT department," the official added. MahaRERA is also checking whether the submitted certificates indicate full or partial occupancy, after several instances of developers misrepresenting partial OCs as full approvals to mislead homebuyers. "While developers upload these certificates, we want to be doubly sure," the official said. MahaRERA has instructed planning authorities to verify OCs within a stipulated timeline. If no response is received within that period, the certificates will be deemed valid by default. However, any discrepancies found later will make the concerned authorities fully liable. "Homebuyers must have access to verified Commencement and Occupancy Certificates before making a purchase decision. This verification drive is critical to restoring trust in Maharashtra's real estate sector," said a MahaRERA official. Many homebuyers complain that while project details are available through the MahaRERA registration number, OCs are often missing. "Builders diligently upload CCs and building plans, but frequently skip uploading OCs, and local authorities don't follow up," officials noted. A Pune-based homebuyer said the developer claimed to possess an OC, but it wasn't available on the MahaRERA website. "It's confusing for buyers. The verification process should be simplified," said Priya P., a first-time investor. Under MahaRERA norms, developers must register projects before selling units, submit quarterly progress and financial reports, and upload verified OCs before withdrawing project funds from escrow accounts. This verification drive is seen as a key step in strengthening regulatory compliance and protecting buyers from fraud, added a official.
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Recovery rate under IBC improved to 32.76% in Q4 of FY25: CareEdge
Overall recovery rate under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code improved to 32.76% in Q4FY25 from 31.39% in Q3FY25, CareEdge said in a report Tuesday. The ratio of resolution to liquidation improved from to 1.89 in Q4FY25 from 0.20 in FY18 even as the average time taken for resolution or liquidation continued to increase for operational creditors (OCs) and financial creditors (FCs), it said. In Q4Y25, the number of cases admitted increased by around 10% YoY even though it is lower than in earlier quarters of FY20, with fewer than 1,000 cases admitted for FY25. Aggregate recovery hovered around 30%, indicating that creditors faced a haircut of around 70% on admitted claims, it said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Confidence packed. Wrinkles left behind. Philips Garment Steamers Book Now Undo "Persistent delays, legal hurdles, particularly due to prolonged litigation in National Company Law Tribunal and other forums-and post-resolution disputes hinder effective recovery, especially in complex cases," it said.
Mint
27-04-2025
- Business
- Mint
Do creditor committees in insolvency cases need an oversight body?
India's ministry of corporate affairs (MCA) is considering the establishment of an oversight body to monitor the functioning of Committees of Creditors (CoC) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). This follows a code of conduct for CoC operations implemented in August 2024, prompted by the Delhi high court's call for improved accountability. The CoC, which steers the corporate debtor through the insolvency process, mainly comprises financial creditors (FCs)—primarily commercial banks—that hold the majority of claims. Operational creditors (OCs) are included only if their claims account for at least 10% of the total, a rarity. The latter typically play a limited role in negotiations. FCs hold considerable power and are assumed to possess the commercial acumen to make key decisions such as selecting resolution applicants, allocating proceeds, working out ways to maximize the corporate debtor's value and deciding between resolution and liquidation. However, this assumption of commercial wisdom has been challenged. The Jet Airways case illustrates the issue. Once a leading airline with assets worth ₹ 15,000 crore, Jet was sent into liquidation in November 2024—five years after entering insolvency. The CoC-selected Jalan-Kalrock Consortium failed to implement the approved resolution plan. Delays, partly due to exceptions granted by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, eroded its asset value until the Supreme Court intervened, ordering liquidation. The episode highlighted the risks of self-regulation and need for structural reform. Our academic research has shown a pattern of opportunism among FCs, which generally recover a higher proportion of their claims than OCs. The inequality is most severe in large insolvencies with minor OC claims. Interestingly, in smaller cases with high post-liquidation value proceeds, OCs with significant claims often receive more equitable treatment than in larger cases. The relative size and proportion of OC claims influence FC generosity, especially when liquidation values are exceeded by the realized proceeds—as seen in the Jet Airways case. Empirical data reveals FCs selectively show generosity—it's more likely when they expect large haircuts even after claiming all proceeds or when OC claims are too small to justify litigation or delay. Larger OCs tend to be treated better, likely due to their strategic importance for revival or their status as key bank clients. The potential for high-stakes litigation may also influence this behaviour. Smaller OCs often settle for sub-par deals to avoid prolonged delays. As asset values decline over time, these creditors bear disproportionate losses. In economies where small producers cannot pass on inflation through higher prices, insolvency laws must better protect OCs to prevent a double blow: shrinking margins and poor bankruptcy recoveries. Our paper published in The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics showed that in the tripartite dynamic between FCs, OCs and the corporate debtor, the interests of the latter two are generally aligned, while FC preferences diverge—except in cases where OC claims are negligible. FC-dominated CoCs often adopt division rules that minimize their losses, which, while rational in the short term, can hurt firm profitability, output and OC payouts. This reflects a broader trade-off between short-term recovery for FCs and long-term economic interests. Including OCs in the CoC poses challenges. It risks prolonging resolutions and reducing asset value. The Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee rightly warned that smaller OCs could take short-sighted positions, undermining resolution efforts. Giving OCs a right to dissent may also backfire as it could enable hold-ups. An oversight body might not solve the problem either. Such a body could increase subjectivity and bureaucracy, exacerbating an already slow resolution process. Average resolution time was 761 days, as of April-June 2024—already a concern. Additional layers of governance may worsen outcomes. We proposed a more practical solution in a paper published in the Global Finance Journal , the adoption of a 'Quasi-Absolute Priority Rule' (Quasi-APR). This norm could set a minimum payout threshold for OCs, preventing small vendors from being wiped out—an outcome that risks ripple effects of distress throughout the economy. Under the Quasi-APR, the liquidation value of secured assets is used first to repay secured creditors. Their residual claims are then treated on par with those of unsecured creditors, including OCs. The proceeds that remain are divided proportionally based on residual claims. The record shows that in many cases, especially small insolvencies with minor OC claims, FCs have already provided payouts exceeding the Quasi-APR. In such scenarios, CoCs likely recognized the critical role of OCs in a successful re-organization. This lends credibility to the Quasi-APR as a fair baseline for OC payouts. The Supreme Court's recent intervention is welcome for recognizing CoC shortcomings. However, the answer is not additional bureaucracy, but clear rule-of-thumb principles that promote fairness and efficiency. The Quasi-APR offers a straightforward and enforceable approach to improve outcomes without further slowing the process. Its adoption could reduce inequities, increase predictability and safeguard the interests of smaller stakeholders, which are often the most vulnerable in bankruptcy proceedings. The authors are professors, MDI Gurgaon.
