Everest Nisarg Greenland Developers Private Limited (ENGDPL) was incorporated in 2008 and has registered office located in Mumbai. The company is engaged in development and construction of residential/ commercial properties especially in the Navi Mumbai region. The company is an SPV promoted by five promoters namely Mr. Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar, Mr. Dineshkumar Murlidhar Pasoria, Mr. Ganesh Valji Vaid, Mr. Mahadev Pragji Gothi and Mr Murji Bhanji Gami. The company is acting as an investing partner for TPV Ventures LLP (TVL) and owns 99% in the same. TVL is an SPV promoted by the same five promoters. TVL presently owns title for two upcoming projects in Vashi and Ghansoli of which Vashi was fully acquired in Aug 2022 and Ghansoli project is in process of acquisition.

­Employee health & safety management is of primary importance to the construction industry given the nature of operations. Additionally, product quality and safety is of utmost significance. Human rights concerns such as forced labor are crucial considering the exploitative industry practices. Furthermore, responsible procurement and community relations are key influencing factors. The inherent material risk to the construction industry includes releasing toxic greenhouse gases and delivering a green building structure by utilizing clean technology. Factors such as ethical business practices, legal and regulatory compliance hold utmost significance in the construction industry, considering the frequency of litigations. Other issues include management compensation and Board oversight.

• ­A successful implementation of project without time and cost overruns
• Financial Closure with specified timelines
• Receiving regulatory approvals on time

The company’s liquidity position is stretched as the sales for the projects have not yet started and the cashflows will be depending on the bookings done and collections to be received. Furthermore, the financial closure for one of the project is yet to be closed. Furthermore, the projects are at a very early stage and the construction has not started yet and the completion of the project on time will depend on the advances from customers.

Acuité believes that the outlook on company’s rated facilities will remain stable over the medium term on account of experience of the promoters in the real estate domain. The outlook may be revised to 'Positive' in case of improvement in cash flow and sales traction. Conversely, the outlook may be revised to 'Negative' in case of any undue delay in the completion of project, or less-than expected customer advances leading to stretch in its liquidity position.

­None

Supplementary disclosures for Provisional Ratings
A. Risks associated with the provisional nature of the credit rating
1. Lack of third party monitoring of compliance in absence of executed trust deed and no finalized terms in absence of final term sheet
2. In case there are material changes in the terms of the transaction after the initial assignment of the provisional rating and post the completion of the issuance (corresponding to the part that has been issued) Acuite will withdraw the existing provisional rating and concurrently, assign a fresh final rating in the same press release, basis the revised terms of the transaction.
B. Rating that would have been assigned in absence of the pending steps/ documentation
The rating would be equated to the standalone rating of the entity: ACUITE B+ / Stable.
C. Timeline for conversion to Final Rating for a debt instrument proposed to be issued: The provisional rating shall be converted into a final rating within 90 days from the date of issuance of the proposed debt instrument. Under no circumstance shall the provisional rating continue upon the expiry of 180 days from the date of issuance of the proposed debt instrument.

­In order to inform the investors about complexity of instruments, Acuité has categorized such instruments in three levels: Simple, Complex and Highly Complex. Acuite’ s categorisation of the instruments across the three categories is based on factors like variability of the returns to the investors, uncertainty in cash flow patterns, number of counterparties and general understanding of the instrument by the market. It has to be understood that complexity is different from credit risk and even an instrument categorized as 'Simple' can carry high levels of risk. For more details, please refer Rating Criteria “Complexity Level Of Financial Instruments” on www.acuite.in.