Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Q3 earnings call for IndiGrid Infrastructure Trust. Today from the management, we have with us Mr.

Harsh Shah, Managing Director; Ms. Meghana Pandit, Chief Financial Officer; and Mr.

Sanil Namboodiripad, Chief Operating Officer. We'll begin the call with the opening remarks from the management, after which we'll have the forum open for interactive Q&A session.

I'll now hand over the call to the management. Thank you, and over to you, sir.

Thank you. I would walk through the presentation for quarter three, and me and team will discuss certain aspects of that, and subsequently we will go for question-answers.

To start with, on slide three, I'll just reiterate our vision. Our vision is to admire the most--become the most admired yield vehicle, focused with a focused business model, value-accretive growth, predictable distribution, and optimal capital structure.

We believe we have been following these four principles over the last several years. On the next slide, slide four, just to reiterate our size today, our AUM is approximately ₹32,800 crores.

We are present in 20 states and two UTs, almost entire country, with about 90 different revenue-generating elements. Which includes 53 lines, 16 substations, 1.5 gigawatt of solar projects, and several BESS projects.

Our transmission and solar assets have substantially longer life and average residual contracts over 20 years, with transmission and most of the transmission assets are on perpetual ownership basis. Going to slide number six with quarterly updates of FY26.

We signed SPA to acquire Gadag Transmission Limited from ReNew. It's 187 circuit kilometers, 1,000 MVA capacity, an ISTS project in Karnataka, for approximately ₹372 crores.

We are expecting to close this transaction in this quarter. We also raised ₹1,500 crores of equity through institutional placement.

The issue was subscribed--oversubscribed by 2x, and we saw widespread participation across new, long-only, and global institutional investors.

Sorry for the disruption. I would repeat, I was talking about the QIP, our institutional placement where we raised ₹1,500 crores, and both our existing as well as new investors participated overwhelmingly in this issue.

We also signed definitive agreements with Energrid to acquire two of the under-construction projects after one year of commissioning which they won in the quarter. One of them was a battery project of 500 megawatt-hour capacity in UP with the counterparty as NVVN for an EV of approximately ₹957 crores, and another ISTS project in Madhya Pradesh with 180 circuit kilometers and 4,500 MVA of transformation capacity for an EV of approximately ₹1,577 crores.

This is the project which Energrid won in this quarter which is located in MP, and it will be developed in BOOT basis by Energrid and transferred to us after office--after COD. With this overall this latest win, overall under-construction portfolio across IndiGrid and Energrid stands at approximately ₹7,500 crores, which offers a predictable pipeline that we see from our current AUM of ₹32,000 crores to approximately ₹40,000 crores.

On the financial performance for the quarter, our revenue growth was at 11.7% on year-on-year basis on account of the new projects that we added in the portfolio over the last year. The same also flowed through our EBITDA, with EBITDA growing approximately 13%.

Our AUM, as I mentioned earlier, is at ₹32,800 crores, with the quarter ended at 61% net debt to AUM. Post the institutional placement which happened in quarter four, our net debt to AUM will be approximately 56.5%.

Collections in quarter three was 90% for transmission and 98% for solar assets. However, the receivable days are substantially lower owing to that more collection that we had received [unclear].

On the distribution front, we are maintaining a DPU at ₹4 a unit, which is 6.7% higher versus same quarter last year and in line with our full-year guidance. Our weighted average availability for entire portfolio remains at 99.7%, and CUF for our solar capacity is at 21.6%.

With the industry update for quarter three in slide number seven, I think the growth on the power sector remains on a good trajectory. We've seen the peak demand that we could meet for the country raised to about 241 gigawatt, which is a sizably higher not just over last few quarters, but if one looks at a few years ago where the peak demand was 200 gigawatt.

We are clearly seeing an uptrend in terms of the ability to meet peak demand, which will eventually translate into the overall consumption of electricity is going up fairly high. Overall installed capacity also increased to approximately 514 gigawatt, with more than 50% is from renewable energy capacity.

We feel that this both overall consumption of electricity as well as focus on renewable is going to put an impetus in transmission capacity that needs to be added and augmented, including battery capacity, over next five to 10 years. The draft NEP 2026, which is at consultation level, we believe is focused on more transmission planning and strengthen the grid reliability for the coming decade.

I think that the importance of energy storage is consistently going up. For last few years starting from the first bid till now, there have been sizable amounts of bid, almost 13 gigawatt-hour of bids under reverse e-auction otherwise have come up.

India is already targeting more than 100 gigawatt of pump storage. We think that overall storage market is going to be on a trajectory to grow over next 10 years.

We feel that the RPOs and the grid and the battery capacity will consistently going up, and that would throw reasonably good opportunities for us to continue to participate and grow our portfolio and increase our yield. On slide eight, we've seen very active bid activity in the transmission and BESS sector.

We've seen overall ₹1,57,000 crores of transmission and BESS bids over a period of next few quarters, which includes a few HVDC bids, as well as smaller state bids and battery bids. We are hopeful that we will continue to able to participate in these bids via Energrid and grow the portfolio.

On slide number nine, we have our quarterly operation performance. I would request Sanil, our Chief Operating Officer, to take you through the same.

Thank you, Harsh. Good evening, everyone.

We are on slide number nine regarding the quarter performance. First is the safety updates.

We had zero medical treatment cases, first aid cases, and lost time incidents, maintaining our health and well-being. Performance-wise, the power transmission business operated with an availability of 99.77%, maintaining steady availabilities.

The solar generation, the Q3 was 551.5 million units at 21.6% CUF. With regard to the reliability, the trips per line, we have maintained at 0.07, maintaining a steady, reliable performance.

Major of the trippings that happened were due to foreign materials, lightning, and thunderstorm, which were beyond our control. Substation trips per element, outages were at 0.01 trips per element, which is better than the average benchmarks.

Solar availability was 98.5%, the plant availability, and some of this was due to various breakdowns, and which were recovered--some of them were recovered under insurance coverage. If you look at the right side, the Q3 availability was of the transmission assets were beyond the normative.

Most of them, except one asset, who operated much well beyond the normative availabilities as per their transmission service agreements. If you look at the key indicators, we are better or at par with regards to the Q3 of the last year.

Number of trips per line last year was 0.09 in the same quarter; today we were, this quarter we were at 0.07. Training man-hours remains steady.

Loss of time incidents were better this year. Unsafe conditions reporting, we encourage always that the reports should be there so that we are able to take preventive and corrective actions, this has improved.

Near miss reporting also has been in a steady way. The utility solar generation was 551 million units, which is slightly better than last year's, and the plant availability remained steady with 21.6% CUF and 98.5% availability.

For the next slide, may I request Meghana to take over?

Thanks. Sanil.

Good afternoon, everyone. I'm on slide number 10 on the Q3 FY26 financial performance.

Starting from the reported revenue, where we clocked an increase of 11.7% over Q3 FY25 and recorded the revenue at ₹862.2 crores. On the EBITDA side, consequently clocked an increase of 13% at ₹784.3 crores.

Both these increases were on the back of the acquisitions that we did in Q1 of this fiscal, the ReNew assets that we acquired on the transmission and solar side, almost about ₹2,100, ₹2,200-odd crores of acquisitions that came through. NDCF generated for the quarter showed a muted performance at around ₹328 crores, largely on the back of changes in the working capital on the collections bit, because Q2 of FY26 we had much larger collection, comparatively on Q3 there has been an adjustment that happened.

DPU for the quarter is declared at ₹4 in line with the guidance for this fiscal of ₹16. On the collection and receivable days, the transmission assets portfolio had collections of 90% in Q3 FY26 versus 100% year-on-year basis.

The days outstanding, DSO days, stood at a very healthy of 38 days as on December 2025 compared to 48 in December '24. On the solar side, collections remained very robust at 98%, with DSO days again at 32 compared to 50 days in December '24, a marked improvement on the collections and DSO days which we have seen in the sector itself.

Moving on, on the distribution update on slide number 11, as I said, the distribution per unit stands at ₹4 for Q3, breakup of which between interest, dividend, capital repayment, and other income stands in line with the trend every quarter. The total outstanding units for the as on date at 95.26 crores.

This is after the institutional placement where we raised ₹1,500-odd crores in the beginning of January. The gross distribution for this quarter stands at ₹381 crores with a record date of Feb 17th and tentative distribution around Feb 24th.

The NAV per unit stands at 146.4 basis the diluted capital after taking into account the institutional placement. The total distribution stands at 113.32 per unit, amounting to 72.67 billion, which is being distributed to the investors since the time we got listed in 2020--in 2017.

The annual distribution trend again looks very healthy, with a 6% CAGR over the last five years, and we are on track on delivering the guidance for the year at ₹16. Moving on to slide number 12 on the consolidated EBITDA to NDCF waterfall.

The EBITDA generated at SPV level stood at ₹756-odd crores, and with all the adjustment in terms of the working capital movements, capex, the NDCF consolidated at SPV level stood at ₹678 crores. After that, adjusting the debt servicing requirements of finance cost, DSRA, working capital movement, the NDCF generated during the quarter stood at ₹328 crores.

The distribution for the quarter stands at 381, to the extent of about ₹52.7 crores we will be utilizing it from the reserves. After the utilization of this 20- ₹53-odd crores from the reserve, the reserve balance stand will stand at ₹520.7-odd crores, which is almost 1, 1 1/2 quarters of distribution on the diluted capital as we speak.

Moving forward on slide number 13 on the balance sheet position. We continue to remain AAA-rated by all the three rating agencies.

The average cost of debt stands at 7.41% as on December 31st, with net debt to AUM leverage ratio at 61% in December, and after the institutional placement it is at 56.5%, leaving a significantly healthy debt headroom for future acquisitions. On the borrowing front, the total fixed rate borrowing between the overall book stands at about 88-odd percent, with floating borrowings at about 12-odd percent.

Cash balance, again including DSRA, including the distribution for the quarter, stands at around 16.59 billion, and an interest coverage ratio of 1.92 times. On the gross borrowing of around ₹21,000-odd crores, the mix between NCDs and bank loan stands at 72 and 28-odd percent, with a diversified debt investor across mutual funds, banks, corporates, provident funds, and a mix of PSUs as well as private banks.

The refinancing schedule that we see at the bottom of the chart shows a diversified and termed-out borrowing profile, ensuring that we do not bunch up any maturities in any particular year and do not cross more than 12-13% of gross borrowing which comes up for refinancing in any particular year. For this for the remainder quarter in this fiscal, almost everything is already refinanced, barring about ₹200-odd crores of refinancing which will come up now.

Moving on to slide number 14 on the total returns to investors. Total returns depicted by the distribution till date and the price change.

As you can see, IndiGrid has clocked a total return of 181% and an annualized return of 13% since the time we got listed. If we compare this with pure debt on one hand, which is depicted by the 10-year and 30-year G-sec bond, and with pure equity, which is depicted by various indices, you can see that on a risk-adjusted basis IndiGrid has outperformed both pure debt and pure equity indices, risk being depicted through the beta, which is very close to zero at 0.06.

Moving on to the business outlook on slide number 15. On the portfolio strategy, we continue to ensure that our focus remains on ensuring the operations remain stable, with predictable and sustainable distribution, while at the same time looking at value-accretive acquisitions.

The greenfield development projects which are there between IndiGrid and Energrid, our focus is ensuring that that execution of the augmentation work as well as the under-construction projects of 7,500 continue to remain on track and we deliver on time. In addition to that, through Energrid, we will proactively participate in further greenfield opportunities on battery and transmission projects.

Similarly, ensure that we deliver the DPU guidance of ₹16 for FY26, supported by disciplined capital employment. On the balance sheet side, again our focus remains on how to optimize the interest cost and ensure how we can elongate the tenor profile through the upcoming acquisitions and refinancing opportunities that come about, and with the kind of leverage ratio that we have achieved ensure that the prudent leverage is also maintained when we look at acquisitions.

Resilient asset management again remains an important pillar where we focus on sustaining at least 99.5% of availability on the operational transmission portfolio. In addition to that, try and strengthen on O&M capabilities, basis digital and predictive analytics, both on the transmission side as well as on the solar side.

Underpinning that, ensure that EHS and ESG practices remain at the forefront. Industry stewardship again continues to be on the forefront, wherein we participate actively on policy shaping, industry dialogues through Ministry of Power, CERC, etc., on the power sector side, and on the other hand on the InvIT side through various forums and through the association also that is formed.

I'll take a pause here, and we can get into the Q&A session for any specific queries.

Hello, good evening. Am I audible?

Hello.

Yes, you are audible.

Yes, you are audible.

Good evening, sir. I'm Shrey Singhania from Singhania Technical Services Private Limited.

I had two questions. Firstly, why have the collections in the transmission business reached 90% from 100% last year, considering we had some collections in the previous quarter as well, but we've constantly observed a dip in the reserves?

What have you got to say about that? Secondly, we've observed falling tariffs across the renewable sector as technology improves.

Companies like JSW Energy, the initial projects that these companies had are facing a bit of legal issues as well. How are we prepared to face similar situations?

Thank you.

Yeah. I think on your first question on slide number 10, if you can have a look at it, you have to average on an annual basis.

The last quarter was 108%, before quarter before that was 93%, and before that was 115%. If you really look at last 12 months, we have honestly collected more than 100%.

I think on a quarterly basis, the collections fluctuate between 90 to 115%. That's how we have monitored.

I think if when you look at the balance sheet, which is the DSO days is an easier way to figure out. We have 38 days, which was 48 days in December '24, which practically shows you that the receivable days have improved, or rather we have collected more cash flows from the last year.

I think it's just a quarterly changes that keeps happening. We don't see there is anything negative or materially wrong in that.

It's rather we are seeing its receivable days are substantially lower than history, which means that the collections are very well done till now. On the on the drawl of the DPU, I think we raised two capital rounds this year, approximately ₹1,900 crores, which means that we are diluted.

Deployment of those capital immediately goes towards repayment of debt, and then when we acquire assets with that headroom is where the DPU grows. Immediately in next quarter, for example, even this quarter when we raise the capital, the dilution impact is one which reduced the NDCF and therefore we draw on our reserve.

As we deploy that and the assets are acquired, that will come back to normal working field. We don't see again negative on that.

The question on JSW, I'm not sure which one you refer, but none of our projects have been renegotiated down. All of them are consistently paid, and we do not see any I would say we haven't felt or even slightly felt any of our projects are coming near any kind of dispute or issues on this front.

Most of the at least renewable projects are operating for over a year to 10 years, I think they are more stabilized ones.

Right. If there is any color that you could give me on, when the equity proceeds raised will be realized as project cash flows, which I believe shall support NDCF, as you were mentioning?

It depends on the acquisition and as well the schedule goes. Immediate use of proceeds is to repayment of debt, which is already done.

We have a pipeline, as I mentioned earlier, of ₹7,500 crores which we'll be acquiring over next starting from three months to two years timeframe, or three months to three-year timeframe, which is known. Clearly those cash flows will add in to NDCF over the period of next three months to three years.

There's a different cycle for each project.

Right. Thank you, and congratulations on the great results.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity. Good evening, all.

Am I audible?

Yeah.

Yeah. Sir, you used to give the DPU slide in Q1 FY26, and you have been giving that historically, but since last quarter and this quarter, I think it has been stopped.

Can you please give that slide? It helps us understand what the existing asset will give and what is the expansion plan.

It was a chart with multiple indicative DPU profile.

Sure. Understood.

Sure. We will start with quarter four, and yeah, go on.

Sure, sir. Thank you.

Congratulations on good set of numbers. One thing, the DPU guidance stays intact, 3 to 5% growth that you've been mentioning?

No,

we don't give growth guidance. We give DPU guidance, which is intact for ₹16.

That will continue. Growth that comes in the quarter four annual board meeting is when we do, and even the DPU projection typically we have done annually.

If you look at our last DPU slide, we would have given in quarter four of '25, now we'll give in quarter four of '26. Just it doesn't change quarter on quarter, but we'll add that in the next quarter.

Okay. Sir, I think there's one asset which was non-operational, Godavari Green, due to some transformer and generator failure.

We have recognized the revenue for that. We have not recognized the revenue loss for that.

If I'm not mistaken, there was similar asset where there was some generator failure last quarter or last to last quarter. Where ideally I think we did not recognize the revenue.

Is there some change in the policy in the revenue recognition? Because there also I think there was a 40- 50-odd crore revenue loss and a 30- 35-crore EBITDA loss, and for which we had filed insurance.

The second question is that, any update on that insurance claim?

I don't know where you're seeing this quarter. The Godavari Green project is operational.

There is no disruption on that. We only recognize revenue when the electricity is generated and sold.

If the asset is not working, we cannot recognize revenue. I'm not sure where there is a this is coming.

Can you check that?

Yeah. It's in your notes, note number three of your unaudited consol financial results, December ended, the latest result only I'm talking, note number three point, bullet point number four, where I think the project was not operating from 21st March to 21st July.

I think, there it is mentioned that management has not recognized the revenue loss. I'm just trying to--

It is a matter of fact. Yeah.

It is a factual position that is shared, and subsequently in July the asset has started back on track. There is no second case.

It is the same case which is repeated in the balance sheet for matter of fact.

There

is nothing else that has happened. On insurance part, I think that it's an ongoing proceed.

We are confident that we'll receive, and there are positive developments. As and when we receive fully, we will be recognizing that in the books of accounts, you will get to realize that.

Okay. Sir, one last point.

We've been seeing there have been grid availability issues in multiple states, including Rajasthan, Gujarat. Any sense on where the sector nuance or how can IndiGrid benefit out of this or the transmission charges might increase in new projects?

Any sense around that?

No, I don't call it grid availability issue. It is grid connectivity issue.

Grid availability issues are only on assets once they are available. That is about this connectivity for new projects.

Fundamentally, the gap is coming because the transmission capacity takes time to build, two to three years, and solar PPAs takes probably much, much lesser to announce and sign. What happens is that it's easier to sign a PPA and announce, and unfortunately, our planning works that you can put in a plant anywhere.

Connectivity is always going to be slower and it takes time. I won't say they are short or they are delayed.

It's just that the way the country has been planning, we have planned generation first, connectivity later, which needs to reverse in having connectivity first, generation PPAs later. I think there is a lot of appreciation of this fact now, and we've seen that's the reason we are seeing new bids coming in, a new pipeline for transmission assets coming in more.

I don't think that has anything to do with transmission rates because that is a competitively bid, but we are seeing a lot more bids on account of this. That's what the whole ₹1,50,000 crore pipeline that we showed that we see that new assets will come.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Congratulations on a wonderful set.

All the best.

Hello, good evening. Can all of you hear me?

Yes, please.

Good evening, Mr. Harsh and team, and congrats on another quarter of excellent performance.

My first question relates to the acquisition of GR Infra assets. We had some kind of a MOU with them a few years back, but haven't heard anything on that.

They decided not to sell assets to us. The MOU MOU got expired.

That did not translate into a an acquisition or a signed definitive agreement. MOU was a agreement on good faith to work towards closure.

However, subsequently, we could not reach an alignment on key terms, it did not take place.

What about the transmission asset that we were supposed to acquire from them?

See, it is their asset. It belongs to them.

They still own the asset.

No. From our end, has there been any follow-up?

No, the agreement expired because if the it was an MOU, it is not a binding agreement. If somebody does not monetize, we cannot really do anything about it, right?

So--

Okay. Fair enough, Mr.

Harsh. Then, we didn't hear about this agreement expiring, and, maybe that is something that was a necessary communication to be sent out to stakeholders.

Because you did announce the MOU, right?

It's we'll have to consider that because, see, the framework agreements are typically non-binding agreements, and a non-binding agreement I think we'll think about it if it makes sense to really announce. We'll take note of this.

No, because as I look at it, once you announce that you have an MOU and there is a specific asset that you're going to acquire once it is commissioned, and if that is not happening, I would say, it to me at least, as an individual investor, I felt I should have heard about it from IndiGrid.

Fair enough. I think it's a point of view.

We respect that. We'll consider.

Obviously, the disclosures are typically we have to see in line with the terms of the agreement. We'll go back and see if we what we are able to do it.

Okay. The second point was also about, I think it has already been raised, about this DPU accretive, that slide.

I think someone has already mentioned it before. Should we get it from the next quarter in the presentation?

We do it, if you check last couple of years of slides, we only share this slide in quarter four of a year. You can look at, next quarter you will obviously see that slide and an annual presentation.

Then subsequently you can refer back the same slide because, honestly, quarter on quarter things don't change in that slide. Anytime you can go to last quarter four slide of FY25, you'll get the same slide.

Quarter three of '25, you'll get '24, you'll get the same slide. Next quarter you will see it, and then again you'll see it in 12 months from then.

Oh, okay. You're making it a yearly, maybe end of the year affair.

Annual. Exactly.

Yes.

Fair enough. Okay.

I wanted to understand, we have, as per your presentation, close to ₹7,500 crores of projects in the pipeline as capex, and our net AUM is about ₹32,000 crores. Am I right?

Yes.

I'm going by your slide. Typically, are we getting into too much of a risk zone where, my understanding was that only 10% of our, projects could be of the total asset value could be under construction, I think this is far in excess of that.

Is there a risk that we're taking on and we are--

No, good point. First, we the ₹7,500 crore includes Energrid assets, we do not have this entirely is not our assets, right?

Energrid builds these assets and subsequently sells to us after it is revenue generating in operations. Under InvIT regulations, we are not allowed to cross 10%.

We will not cross 10%. ₹7,500 crores is over a period of three years, and IndiGrid buys it when it is completed and revenue generating.

We do not see reaching closer to 10% or breaching 10% in the future. We are not adding ₹7,500 crores of under-construction risk.

This portfolio is with Energrid, and we will acquire when it's operational. It we are sharing it to showcase that we have signed the agreement.

For example, we signed two agreements this quarter for one for NVVN for ₹957 crores, and other for MP which is ₹1,577 crores, which is put together approximately ₹2,600 crores. This is included in ₹7,500 crores.

This ₹2,600 crores will come to IndiGrid when assets are revenue generating and for one year, right? It is probably going to come three years from now, right?

For this there are binding agreements, and that's why we write that definitive agreements are signed. This is not a ₹2,600 crore risk for IndiGrid.

I hope I'm able to explain that.

No, I understand that because Energrid asset is a, technically it's a separate entity. I guess we still own 33% of Energrid, right?

Am I right in that?

Correct. We will have one-third of it, which is less than much less than 10%.

Okay. It's an indirect risk anyways.

because, we have to buy those assets.

That's right. We want to buy those assets, not have to.

That's why we're signing agreements. We buy those assets when they are completed.

I understand. As an investor, we should keep it in mind that, though those assets are supposed to come to IndiGrid, and then if I look at that as a percentage, then I think you're close to somewhere around 20% of assets under construction.

Okay.

Why? When they come to IndiGrid, they're completed.

Then you're calculating the percentage is wrong.

Fair enough. Again, a different

point of view. You're buying completed projects, it's not under construction.

Okay. Look, previously, whenever there was an acquisition, because I have been invested in IndiGrid for a long, long time, there always be used to be a very clear figure as to how much the acquisition would be DPU accretive.

Why is it that we don't have that figure in the later acquisitions, the past few acquisitions that we've had?

I think a few reasons, right? One, we have found that sometimes an asset-specific accretion misleading, because an individual asset whether we show as funded in what manner, right?

What that equity. It becomes, I would say, extremely complicated for unitholders to make interpretation.

However, in the press release, we still mention how much is the NDCF coming for that acquisition, so that data is still available. You can refer No,

in the press that's okay. Mr.

Harsh, I think that is exactly the point. I remember that in the press release, previously there used to be a very clear number that this is so many crores NDCF accretive.

I don't think that number is appearing.

No, it is there. It is still there.

It is still there, which See, these are not the acquisitions which are done. The Energrid acquisitions are signed.

When we complete

No, I'm not talking of Energrid, I'm not talking of these. I'm talking about the ReNew or those acquisitions also which were, I maybe I'll check.

ReNew acquisition is Please check, we still disclose NDCF post the acquisition. We do mention.

When we acquired the NDCF when we acquired ReNew asset in this financial year, we mentioned over ₹100 crore in RSPCL and KNTL asset that we acquired, which was the last asset that we acquired. These are the agreements that we have signed, when we acquire we do mention.

Yeah.

Okay. Maybe my bad.

I'll check once again. Whenever we make an acquisition, are our acquisitions in some way related to the prevailing interest cost?

Because the NAV keeps varying as per the prevailing interest cost, right? For maybe a AAA-rated asset?

Yes. Yes.

In that case, this Techno Electric asset, is it why is it that we have signed an agreement so much well in advance, or is it that at the time of the actual signing of the agreement there will be a consideration if there are interest rate fluctuations?

No. No, there is no variation.

There are different types of agreements we sign. This agreement is such that where we have fixed the value of the agreement, and we have synergies on that asset.

Sometimes we sign framework, and if we find framework, as you yourself mentioned, GR Infra did not sell the asset to us where the value was open, right? We prefer to lock in the asset wherever we sign the agreement, and for that we lock in the value as well.

That's the way we have transacted on Techno Electric asset.

If there is a change in interest rate at that point of time, that could actually go against us as well?

Yes, it can go against us, it can go for us as well. It can go either ways.

Okay. Previously, I think till 2018, 2019, one of the things that IndiGrid aspired to be was best-in-class corporate governance.

This used to be specifically mentioned as a part of the presentation. Somewhere around 2020, I think, we removed that.

Any specific reason? We added more 'admired yield vehicle', and we removed 'best-in-class corporate governance'.

Any thought that went into it at that point of time?

I think I'll have to refer back six-year-old notes. I think what I can tell you, we do follow best-in-class corporate governance day in, day out, and therefore we don't need to mention it, I would say.

It is part of our ingrained nature, we don't need to mention it as a strategy. I think all our unitholders, our investment managers, and sponsor expect us to do that as a matter of fact instead of as a strategy.

I think that's the reason one can really take home to do it. I don't recollect when Sometimes,

my point is that, sometimes when you put it there, it makes you a little more conscious. I understand I have, I have been a long-term investor.

I think I'm invested, for more than seven, eight years now. I understand that, but I sometimes feel that, you put it in the presentation, every quarter you have to look at it, and maybe ask yourself some questions, it makes you more conscious.

I think there are enough things to remind us to do that. We don't need to put it in We have annual reports, a semi-annual reports, you can look at that.

There are SEBI compliances, regulations we follow. I think there is enough, but I think we take input.

We'll see if this is really thing to work.

Why this bias towards institutional investors when you're raising funds and, repeatedly when recently funds have been raised, have you ever thought of a rights issue so that retail investors also could benefit? Now that, 30% of your investors, which you have clearly proudly stated in the presentation, are retail investors.

No, there is no bias of retail versus institutional or otherwise. I think it is a pure strategy.

For example, we have done a rights issue, if I'm not wrong, four years ago. It's not that we have not done rights issue, we have done it in 2021.

However, what happens is that for rights issue to succeed, you need to have 90% subscription, and that requires us to give discount to ensure that 90% subscription happen, which I don't think is in is the right business decision for the business itself. If if there are unitholders who are valuing the unit at, say, our institutional placement was ₹163, we would rather do institutional placement at ₹163 rather than do a rights issue at ₹155.

For the business, that is the right decision, okay? I think for us, what is right for the business is right for everyone, we try to follow that.

That's that's the first rationale of doing institutional placement. The second rationale is that over a longer period of time, we are an acquisitive business, we will continue to grow, and it'll be important for both retail, all shareholders, that there are institutional shareholders who have ability to contribute large capital.

Yes, the retail shareholders' ability over last several years have increased massively, the liquidity has increased massively. Having said so, if we were to do a ₹1,500 crore or rather ₹1,500 crore we did today, but let's say we acquire a larger project, if we want to do ₹3,000 crores of rights issue, ₹3,000 crores of capital raise, I don't think the liquidity is reached to the extent that one can safely assume that ₹3,000 crore will come, right, just from retail market.

I think we have to maintain a balance of long-term large-pocket investors, as well as the first decision is that if the retail comes at a substantial discount, unitholders may feel that they got a better deal, but over a longer period of time, for business it's a it's a raw deal, right? I think we have to balance both.

That's why we take decision of institutional placement this time.

Earlier we have

done rights issue before. Right.

The rights issue would be for a

Yeah, rights issue is anyway for existing investors, right? I don't think there should be any reason for existing investors to feel shortchanged if they have the right.

No, it's not about investors getting shortchanged. For example, a ₹1,500 crore capital gives us, say, ₹7,000 crores of acquisition pipeline, right, on a 70-30 basis.

If rights issue happen at a discount, the accretive nature accretive result goes out, because now you don't Now for those ₹7,500 crores you need a higher yield to make it accretive. If you acquire those asset or if you So instead of issuing 5 crore units, you'll have to raise 6 crore units, which means you need to deliver growth on 6 crore units.

Mathematically, you expect the assets have to yield much higher to be accretive. It's not about one unitholder.

As a business, when we raise capital, dilutes. The new project that we win needs to be more profitable to meet the growth requirement for DPU, right?

It puts stress on the business if you dilute at a deeper discount.

Okay. My next question is related to operational availability of the assets.

This JK, TPL, I see that again this quarter again it is not available, does that mean that we are going to lose some revenue this year on that asset?

We might lose some incentives on that asset, yes. That asset is a very small percentage of our overall asset, but it's yeah, we have a issue on that asset, so that's we've restored the issue, but I think it's a very small asset that will do.

Over currently, we have taken a planned outage, it'll be back to normal availability in quarter four.

No, but I think even before in Q1, there were a lot of assets which were well below the 98%, now of course I see that most of them are well above the 98%, but this asset still continues to be down. Any other asset where we will lose revenue this year because of low availability?

No, you have to read our annual report for that. I'm not sure for this quarter.

If you ask me last three quarters which assets have changed, I won't remember exactly. We've got 50 lines.

This asset, as I mentioned, it's less than a percent of our size, or rather less than 0.75% of our size. I don't see this asset having a material impact on our overall revenue for that.

Second, we calculate our year-to-date availability, at least this quarter as you can see none of the assets other than this is impacted. For next quarter, you will share how it goes.

Okay. Thank you so much.

Last question, you mentioned that you started using AI. What are the domains in which this is being used, and are we going to see impacts in the years ahead in terms of reduced maintenance costs?

I think for AI for us is more for productivity increase in terms of ability to manage our shutdowns better, ability to manage our productivity of labor on ground for inspection better, ability to predict faults, pretty much those kind of things. We have been using it is not a really all AI-ML type of stuff, it's very basic fundamental digitization that has helped us to improve our productivity.

We're already seeing that impact. I don't think that's going to materially change over next 10 years.

Since inception, which is 10 years, our EBITDA percentage has remained in the range of 88 to 89% to 90%. Our core goal is to beat inflation, right?

On availability, on O&M cost, and we have been consistently done that over last 10 years. We would like to push the envelope and continue to do for next 10 years, but it's not suddenly next year we will have 2% higher EBITDA because of AI.

I don't see that kind of change or a material impact on our business today. There's an incremental impact to ensure that we keep our productivity well.

Thank you. Thank you so much for being so patient and taking all the questions.

Thank you so much, and once again, congratulations for the good work that is being done.

Thank you.

Hi. Good afternoon.

I have two questions. One is, since most of the solar or probably even wind take a lot less time than transmission assets to complete, have you considered even bidding for solar projects in your through Energrid?

My second question is about when is your first transmission asset that would expire the contract will expire? Because I'm more curious to know how the renegotiations happen.

That's all. One request is if you could limit 2+1 questions to the callers, that would be helpful, because I've been waiting for 25 minutes on the call.

Thank you

very much.

Thank you. To answer your second question first, it's an asset called ENICL, which was one of the first asset that was built in by 2014.

That's November 2014 is a built of that asset. We will see somewhere extension discussion happening in 25 years from there, because the first asset had a 25-year contract, everything else was 35.

Maybe 2030, 2029-2030. Very few years away.

Not 30 actually, 2040. It's quite far, 2039.

At least 15 years from now, fairly away. Sorry, I missed your first question, if you can

The first question is about whether you're open to bidding for solar or wind projects in future.

Yeah. Energrid is exclusive arrangement between IndiGrid, Norfund, and BII for transmission and BESS projects.

We are not exclusive on solar. At this point in time, we have not bid for any solar or wind project, and I don't think there is anything in plan that we will expand in next quarter or two and start bidding for solar projects.

Many a times we have thought about it, but we have not taken that initiative yet.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you, thank you, Sanil.

Yes, sir. It is already been answered.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for joining on the quarterly call. This quarter has been at least for a fairly consummating quarter.

We raised capital which gives us pipeline till ₹40,000-₹45,000 crores of assets. Our Energrid initiative has been yielding results, we have signed agreements of ₹2,600 crores with Energrid.

We acquired assets from ReNew. We are hopeful that the growth journey continues and we are able to deliver on a promise of predictable DPU and growing that.

Thank you for investing in us and trusting us with your capital, and looking forward to see you next quarter. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks, everyone.