I think they may have opted to switch from live earnings calls to offline investor meetings and analyst meets just for selected big players. I have been waiting for the same
5 Likes
Ok..Is it not mandatory for companies to hold concalls?
2 Likes
Yes, not yet mandatory, but I hope SEBI should come up with some law to make it for the Nifty 500 Companies mandatory at least
4 Likes
anyone have idea why this stock rising with strong volume except tax exemption buzz and 28 MV completion on 4 august and please share your views on this stock .
3 Likes
The bull thesis for this one was simple for me. Firstly prime Real estate companies already have premium valuations … ofcourse its an investors decision whether to classify Anant Raj as a prime real estate builder but anyway. Inspite of all that and their massive data center ecpansion P/E was slashed to 40 odd levels. That looked like great value … not sure now. Also like the annuity model of their business. Good revenue predictability … sinilar thinking why I chose KPI over Waaree
6 Likes
Anant Raj Ltd. has successfully raised ₹1,100 Cr. through QIP at the issue price of ₹662 per share.
The company now has about ₹1,200 Cr. (inc. ₹100 Cr. Promoter warrants) of proceeds earmarked to accelerate scaling of its data-center vertical.
ARL QIP.pdf (1.3 MB)
13 Likes
We are seeing TCS entering into Data center space with plans to have 1 GW of DC by next 5 years, Google has also set up big targets and announced huge FDI for DC in Vizag (that is also 1 GW I guess). Reliance is already building largest data center in Jamnagar of 2 GW.
This makes me wonder where do companies like Anant Raj stand and how this affects its data center business? Isn’t it going to affect their data center business as the competition from these big players will be huge as they build huge capacity or is there something I am missing here? Does Anant Raj has any competitive advantage over these companies?
8 Likes
Opportunity size seems big enough that it should allow multiple players to co exist
3 Likes
Tcs can not do what anant ran is doing in data space….
Land is raw material here that is plenty available for anant raj
2 Likes
you’re right to be worried hyperscalers (Google/TCS/Reliance/Tata/etc.) building gigawatt-scale campuses change the market but they don’t instantly kill Anant Raj’s business IMO. Anant Raj is a regional, land-rich data-centre + sovereign-cloud player. The risk is real (oversupply / price pressure / capex competition), but there are clear ways Anant Raj can remain relevant and even profitable if it executes.
For Example Governments and regulated enterprises often prefer domestic or sovereign cloud providers and managed offerings rather than raw wholesale racks in a hyperscaler campus. Anant Raj’s Ashok Cloud + Orange tie-up is exactly aimed at that gap.
No RECO, Invested, Biased
6 Likes
Seems like an unchartered territory for the company. Only time will tell how well they end up executing in this new branch of their business.
3 Likes
I wonder from where they will get 4,500 crores from.
1 Like
@Vardhaman_Lodha They recently raised Rs 1,100 crore via (QIP), which will go into the expansion of the data centre business.
Thanks for you reply. I presume they need those for building the 307 MV of DC toegther with internal accruals from their DC business over the period. Unsure if they can also use the funds realised from DC business into the Rs. 4,500 crore DC, and if they are sufficient. I guess probably they may raise some debt/equity in 2-3 years down the line.
1 Like
@Vardhaman_Lodha yes Possibly another round of QIP
1 Like
I am doing fundamental analysis for Anant Raj as I am looking to invest in the stock. everyone here is talking about the bright prospect of DC & cloud infra. But during my analysis, I came across a rather unchrted territory of huge RPT. I am presenting my RPT analysis here. Everyone is welcome to give their view/analyis on the RPT transaction of the company and if it signals any risk:
Key observations from RPT notes:
A. Quantitative Overview (FY24 vs FY25)
| Particulars | FY25 (₹ Cr) | FY24 (₹ Cr) | % of Revenue (FY25) | % of Revenue (FY24) | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue | 2,059.97 | 1,491.01 | – | – | Base for RPT % calculation |
| Loans to Related Parties – Standalone | 686.21 | 577.02 | 33.32% | 38.70% | Loans to subsidiaries, LLPs & associates – fully visible in standalone |
| Loans to Related Parties – Consolidated | 396.95 | 87.53 | 19.27% | 5.87% | In consolidation, loans to group entities are eliminated |
| Difference (Standalone – Consolidated) | 289.26 | 489.49 | – | – | Indicates loans likely given to wholly-owned entities (eliminated in consolidation) |
| Profit Share from LLPs/Associates | 36.01 | 39.27 | 1.75% | 2.63% | Profit booked from LLPs – cash conversion unclear |
| Interest Income from LLPs | 22.70 | 28.33 | 1.10% | 1.90% | Income from loans – dependent on LLP repayment ability |
| Corporate Guarantees / Commitments | 375.14 | 401.16 | 18.22% | 26.90% | Indicates potential liability spillover if affiliates default |
Total RPT Economic Exposure (Loans + Guarantees) in FY25 = ₹1,061 Cr → ~51.5% of Total Revenue
B. Break-up of Loans to Related Parties (Material Exposure)
| Recipient Type | FY25 (₹ Cr) | FY24 (₹ Cr) | Key Observations / Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subsidiaries | 464.61 | 399.91 | Funding for internal real estate & data centre SPVs |
| LLPs (Project SPVs) | 178.54 | 146.34 | Possible internal ecosystem – profit routed via LLPs |
| Associates | 39.70 | 1.72 | Sharp YoY increase – new external dependency |
| Relatives of KMP | 12.29 | 0.12 | Direct promoter-linked loan – governance red flag |
→ Loans to RPTs = 93.7% of total loans (Standalone) → indicates capital flow outside parent entity.
C. Key Trend Analysis (Standalone)
| Metric | Observed Trend | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| RPT Loans / Revenue | ↓ from 38.7% → 33.3% | Improvement but still elevated |
| LLP Income / Revenue | ↓ from 4.5% → 2.9% | Lower reliance on LLP profit – positive |
| Loans to KMP relatives | ↑ from ₹0.12 Cr → ₹12.29 Cr | Sharp jump – requires monitoring |
| Corporate Guarantees | ₹375 Cr (18.2% of revenue) | High contingent liability risk |
5 Likes
In continuation of my previous analysis of RPT risk, below given the prominent legal issues/complaints involving Anant Raj and theris sister concerns:
| Legal Disputes/Complaints involving Parent Company Anant Raj | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regulatory Body | Case Status | Key Findings | Penalty/Award | Severity | ||
| Gurugram Civil Court (Judge Jyoti Grover) | CONCLUDED - Stay Granted (Nov 2, 2024) | Anant Raj obtained DTCP license by fraudulently concealing (i) existing Feb 8, 2022 stay order (ii) land demarcation invalidity (iii) joint undivided land status. License invalid per law. Demarcation ceased to exist April 25, 2023 making Oct 18, 2023 license void | PROJECT STAY - Complete halt of 12-acre project. Status quo maintained. Restrained from all transactions | CRITICAL | ||
| SDM Badshahpur / DTCP / Court | CONCLUDED - Demarcation Invalidated | 2018 demarcation done without notifying 26-27 land owners. SDM invalidated demarcation in 2022-2023. Developer then concealed these stay orders when obtaining DTCP license. Prima facie case established in court | Land owner rights protected. Demarcation legally void | CRITICAL | ||
| Delhi High Court / Criminal Court (Crl.M.C. 1574, 1564, 1563/2011) | CONCLUDED - Criminal Proceedings (Oct 1, 2012) | Ashim Sarin, Anil Sarin (MD), Aman Sarin (Anant Raj) submitted false NOCs/inspection reports (Mar 20-25, 2008) showing completion when construction incomplete. Violating sanctioned building plans. MCD engineer V.K. Gupta and officer O.P. Meena implicated. Directors found actively involved day-to-day and direct beneficiaries of forged docs | Criminal charges filed. Cheating, forgery, conspiracy confirmed. Court found prima facie evidence of criminal conspiracy | CRITICAL | ||
| Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) | CONCLUDED - Questioning (No charges) | Amit Sarin (Chairman/CEO) questioned by CBI regarding Rs 102 crore transfer to Sidharth Consultancy (Giraffe Consultancies). ADAG joint venture for two hotels. Money trail investigation ongoing. Sarin maintained no direct scam role but admitted financial dealings with ADAG | No formal charges, but questioned extensively. Rs 102 crore transfer remains under scrutiny | HIGH | ||
| National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) / Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering | ACTIVE - NAA Re-investigation Ordered (2022) | Smt. Renu Mittal complaint: Maceo project. Failed to pass on GST benefits post-July 2017 implementation. Improper pricing and margin calculation. NAA ordered re-investigation by DGAP | NAA directed re-investigation. Financial details confidential. Pattern of not passing GST benefits to consumers | HIGH | ||
| RERA (Real Estate Regulation Act Section 31, Rule 28) | FILED - Status Under Investigation | Manmohan Vig complaint (Mar 26, 2018) against Anant Raj Industries. False statements about clear title at project launch and agreement execution. Allegations of cheating with criminal facets directed at directors | Criminal complaint facets identified. Referred for investigation | HIGH | ||
| Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) - Complaint No. 6493 of 2022 | CONCLUDED - Feb 1, 2024 / Dec 2, 2024 | Mohit Bansal purchased flat in Maceo, Sector 91, Manesar for Rs 14,00,000. Builder charged Green PLC Rs 3,81,102 without providing promised facilities. Significant project delay. HRERA found deficiency in service | HRERA DIRECTED: (i) Pay interest for delay (ii) Execute conveyance deed (iii) Refund unjustified PLC charges Rs 3,81,102 | HIGH | ||
| National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Presiding: Subhash Chandra, Member) | CONCLUDED - Feb 1, 2024 | Complainant sued for financial loss from bank loan interest (purchased flat). Legal notice issued seeking refund with 18% interest. National Commission found company liable for deficiency and unfair trade practices | AWARD: Refund with 18% interest + Compensation for mental torture, litigation costs, loss of use of money | HIGH | ||
| Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) - Multiple Cases (RERA-GRG-3310-2024, Complaint 6493/2022, etc.) | DISPOSED/DIRECTED - Ongoing Pattern | Multiple homebuyers filed complaints regarding inordinate delays in possession. Systematic issues across projects documented. HRERA database shows recurring complaints | Consistent HRERA rulings favoring homebuyers. Interest payments, conveyance deeds, refunds ordered repeatedly | MEDIUM | ||
| Delhi High Court | DOCUMENTED - Governance Issue | Raghunath Builders v. Anant Raj. Dispute over POA execution. Allegation of no consideration extended for POAs as alleged by respondent (Anant Raj) | Civil dispute indicating governance and execution issues | MEDIUM | ||
| National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) | ACTIVE - CIRP Initiated Against Subsidiary | Anant Raj subsidiary Grandstar underwent CIRP. Disclosed in Annual Report 2023-24. Indicates financial stress in group companies | Subsidiary under insolvency. Parent company net debt Rs 267.66 crore (Mar 31, 2024) down from Rs 967.27 crore. Debt reduction goal: net debt-free by Dec 2024 | MEDIUM | ||
| Supreme Court of India (Feb 4, 2007) | CONCLUDED - Appeal Decided | Anant Raj challenged Haryana government rejection of land license application (Sector 63A). Alleged malfunction and tailor-made mechanisms for privileged builders. Company questioned departmental functioning | Complex judgment. Issues regarding government land allocation processes noted. Raises governance concerns | MEDIUM | ||
| Supreme Court of India (Apr 12, 2016; IA 2/2016; RP 3155/2016) | CONCLUDED - Rights NOT Restored (Apr 12, 2016) | Anant Raj Agencies Pvt Ltd sought restoration of leasehold to freehold conversion. Multiple applications (IA, Review Petitions) filed but unsuccessful. Supreme Court dismissed claims | Setback: Failed conversion attempt. Rights not restored. Historical land title issues with government | MEDIUM | ||
| National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission | DECIDED - Jan 29, 2024 | Consumer complaint against Anant Raj Ltd. Details restricted but indicates pattern of consumer grievances | Consumer commission order dated Jan 29, 2024 | MEDIUM | ||
| State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission / National Commission | DISPOSED - Jul 17, 2024 (Complaint No. 72 of 2019) | Multiple homebuyer complaint indicating pattern of consumer dissatisfaction | Complaint disposed. Pattern of grievances documented | MEDIUM | ||
| Sister Concerns & KMP Involvement in Disputes – Comprehensive Timeline | ||||||
| Entity Name | Entity Role | Dispute/Case Type | Key Allegations | Period | KMP/Directors Involved | Case Status & Outcome |
| Papillon Estate Ltd | SPV - Motel Project (Village Rajokri, Delhi) | MCD Forged Completion Certificate / Cheating / Criminal Conspiracy | Submitted forged/false completion certificates to MCD on 5 March 2008 for motel construction. Certificates claimed construction complete when work was ongoing. Conspiracy with MCD officials V.K. Gupta (Superintending Engineer) and O.P. Meena (JE) to abuse official position. | Mar 2008 – Oct 2012 | Aman Sarin(Director - Papillon Estate Ltd & Executive Director - Anant Raj Industries Ltd) Ashim Sarin(Executive Director) Anil Sarin(Managing Director - Anant Raj Industries Ltd) | Criminal proceedings initiated. Delhi High Court (Crl.M.C. 1574/2011) found prima facie evidence of conspiracy. All three Sarin directors implicated in preparing forged documents and supervising construction. Trial concluded with findings against directors. |
| Grand Meadows | SPV - Motel Project (Village Samalka, Delhi) | MCD Forged Completion Certificate / Cheating / Criminal Conspiracy | Submitted false completion notice and forged documents to MCD on 5 March 2008. Construction incomplete but false certificates issued. Criminal conspiracy with same MCD officials as Papillon case. | Mar 2008 – Oct 2012 | Aman Sarin(Director - Grand Meadows & Executive Director - Anant Raj Industries Ltd) Ashim Sarin(Executive Director - regularly visited site, awarded contracts) Anil Sarin(Managing Director - interacted with other accused) | Criminal case filed. Court found Ashim Sarin regularly visited site and supervised basement shuttering work. PW-19 Hemant Varshney testified all construction documents prepared by Aman, Ashim & Anil Sarin. Directors found to be authorized signatories and active participants. |
| Anant Raj Ltd + Three Unnamed Sister Concerns | Flagship + 3 Co-licensee SPVs | Construction License Fraud / Forgery / Concealment | Obtained DTCP group housing license (12 acres, Sector 65 Gurugram) on 18 Oct 2023 by fraudulently concealing: (i) Stay order dated 8 Feb 2022 from DTCP, (ii) Land demarcation invalidation (Apr 2023), (iii) Joint undivided land status. License granted for joint land, which is legally impermissible. | Feb 2022 – Nov 2024 | Not explicitly named in public reports, but project underAnant Raj Ltd flagshipwith three sister concern co-developers | CRITICAL OUTCOME:Gurugram Civil Court (Judge Jyoti Grover) issued complete project stay on 2 Nov 2024. All construction, land sales, third-party transactions restrained. Criminal forgery complaint filed with Gurugram Police Commissioner (East). Developer to appeal. |
| Anant Raj Ltd(formerly Anant Raj Industries Ltd) | Flagship Listed Entity | 2G Spectrum Scam – CBI Investigation (Money Trail) | CBI questioned regarding alleged role in transfer of Rs 102 crore to Sidharth Consultancy (formerly Giraffe Consultancies). Investigation into ADAG/Reliance group financial dealings in 2G scam. Company had joint venture with ADAG for two hotels. | Mar-11 | Amit Sarin(Director & CEO / Chairman - Anant Raj Group) | CBI questioned Amit Sarin on 1-2 Mar 2011. Sarin stated company had JV with ADAG for two hotels; maintained no role in 2G scam. Released after questioning; no charges filed against company or Sarin. Investigation continued into ADAG dealings. |
| Anant Raj Ltd | Flagship | Consumer Complaint - Deficiency in Service / Delay / Misrepresentation (Maceo Project, Sector 91 Manesar) | Homebuyer Mohit Bansal paid Rs 14 lakh + Rs 3.81 lakh Green PLC without promised facilities. Significant delay in possession. Unfair trade practices. | 2018 – Dec 2024 | Company-level case(no individual KMP named in public order) | HRERA Complaint No. 6493/2022 decided in buyer’s favor. Order by Ashok Sangwan (Member). Anant Raj directed to: pay delay interest, execute conveyance deed, refund unjustified PLC. |
| Anant Raj Ltd | Flagship | National Consumer Commission - Deficiency in Service / Delay / Financial Loss | Homebuyer booked flat, agreement promised possession in 36 months. Delay caused financial loss (bank loan interest). Issued legal notice seeking refund with 18% interest. Allegations of unfair trade practices and mental torture. | 2018 – Feb 2024 | Company-level case(no individual KMP named) | National Consumer Commission (Member: Subhash Chandra) held Anant Raj liable for deficiency on 1 Feb 2024. Awarded: refund with 18% interest, compensation for mental torture, litigation costs, bank loan interest loss. |
| Anant Raj Ltd | Flagship | GST Anti-Profiteering Violation (Maceo Project) | Consumer complaint by Smt. Renu Mittal alleging company failed to pass GST benefits to homebuyers post-July 2017 GST implementation. Improper pricing charged. | 2017 – 2022 (ongoing) | Company-level case(no individual KMP named) | National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) ordered re-investigation by DGAP (Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering) in Oct 2022. Company required to justify pricing and GST pass-through. Investigation active. |
| Anant Raj Industries Ltd | Flagship (former name) | Consumer Complaint - Title Misrepresentation / Fraud | Manmohan Vig filed complaint on 26 Mar 2018 alleging misrepresentation of property title. False statements about clear title at project launch and agreement execution. Allegations of cheating with criminal facets against directors. | Mar 2018 – status unclear | Directors implicated(names not specified in public snippet; complaint filed under RERA Section 31 / Rule 28) | Complaint No. 112/2018 filed with criminal facets. Investigation/outcome status not publicly available. |
| Grandstar Realty Private Limited | Subsidiary | Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) / Financial Distress | Subsidiary underwent insolvency proceedings. Financial stress in group companies. Parent company net debt Rs 267.66 crore (FY 2023-24, down from Rs 967.27 crore prior year). | 2019 – 2024 (ongoing) | Company-level insolvency(no individual KMP named in CIRP; parent company board: Amit Sarin - MD, Aman Sarin - CEO, Ashim Sarin - COO per FY24 annual report) | CIRP initiated against Grandstar. NCLT proceedings ongoing. Disclosed in Anant Raj Annual Report 2023-24 as significant order impacting subsidiary. |
| Anant Raj Agencies Pvt Ltd | Group SPV | Land Title / Municipal Dispute | Dispute with Municipal Corporation of Delhi over property matters. Challenge to Lt. Governor order dated 27 May 2009 that set aside appellate tribunal order. | 2007 – 2009 | Company-level case(no individual KMP named in available snippet) | Delhi High Court writ proceedings filed. Outcome not fully detailed in public records. |
| Anant Raj Ltd (formerly Anant Raj Industries Ltd) | Flagship | State License Grant Dispute (Sector 63A Gurugram) | Challenge to rejection of land license application. Allegations of DTCP malfunction and tailor-made mechanisms favoring privileged builders. | Pre-2007 – Feb 2007 | Company-level appeal(no individual KMP named) | Supreme Court judgment on 4 Feb 2007 on methodology of license grant. Complex ruling on Haryana government licensing process. Indicates historical friction with DTCP. |
| Anant Raj Agencies Pvt Ltd | Group SPV | Leasehold to Freehold Conversion Dispute | Sought conversion of leasehold property to freehold and restoration of rights post-Supreme Court judgment (12 Apr 2016). Filed IA No.2/2016, RP No.3155/2016 (unsuccessful). | 2007 – Feb 2018 | Company-level case(no individual KMP named) | Supreme Court denied restoration of rights (Apr 2016). Review petitions failed. Setback for company; historical land title issues with government. |
| Multiple Amalgamated Sister Concerns | Various SPVs merged into flagship | Environmental / Regulatory Compliance Disputes | All sister concerns of petitioner company amalgamated pursuant to Delhi High Court company petition. Combined entity then faced environmental/compliance scrutiny over project impacts. | Pre-2016 – 2016+ | Post-amalgamation entity(no individual KMP named; management per FY24 report: Amit, Aman, Ashim Sarin) | Amalgamation completed. Merged entity appeared in environmental tribunal proceedings. Names of individual SPVs not fully disclosed in public records. |
| Anant Raj Ltd | Flagship | Multiple RERA Complaints - Pattern of Delay & Consumer Grievances | Systemic pattern: Multiple homebuyers filed complaints at Haryana RERA for project delays, possession issues, title problems. RERA database shows multiple case numbers (RERA-GRG-3310-2024, 6493/2022, Saranpal Singh case 108/2020, etc.) | 2018 – 2024 | Company-level pattern(no individual KMP named in orders; executive management: Amit Sarin - MD, Aman Sarin - CEO, Ashim Sarin - COO per current structure) | Pattern of adverse rulings:HRERA consistently ruled in favor of homebuyers. Multiple orders directing interest payments, conveyance deed execution, refunds. Indicates systemic compliance and delivery issues. |
13 Likes