India Home Loans has clarified a typographical error in the scrutinizer’s report for its 36th annual general meeting held on September 11, 2026. The company stated that resolutions 4 and 5 were inadvertently reproduced as repetitive in the initial filing.

The Bombay Stock Exchange received the clarification on September 21, 2026. India Home Loans emphasized that the error is purely typographical and does not affect the substance, validity, or voting results of the resolutions.

Voting Results Overview

The revised scrutinizer’s report confirms the voting outcomes for all five items placed before shareholders. Only resolution 1 was passed with the requisite majority.

Resolution 1, an ordinary resolution to adopt the audited financial statements for the financial year ended March 31, 2026, received 62.93% of valid votes in favor. A total of 65 members voted in favor, casting 6,488,931 votes, while 8 members voted against with 3,822,477 votes.

Governance Resolutions Fail

The remaining four resolutions failed to secure the necessary majority. Resolution 2, concerning the re-appointment of retiring director Mr. Mitesh M. Pujara, received only 48.38% support. Similarly, resolution 5, which sought his re-appointment as whole-time director for three years, also garnered 48.38% affirmative votes.

Special resolutions 3 and 4, regarding the appointment of CEO Mr. Mahesh N. Pujara as managing director and the re-appointment of independent director Mr. Mahesh Shah respectively, each received 50.51% support. This fell short of the 75% threshold required for special resolutions under the Companies Act, 2013.

What the Numbers Show

The voting data reveals a significant divergence between shareholder approval for financial statements versus governance changes. While nearly two-thirds of voting power supported the FY26 financial results, less than half backed the continuation of key board members. This suggests shareholder dissatisfaction with specific leadership appointments despite acceptance of the company’s financial performance for the year ended March 31, 2026.

India Home Loans Limited reported that four out of five resolutions placed before shareholders at its 36th Annual General Meeting failed to secure the requisite majority. The meeting, held on September 11, 2026 via video conferencing, saw only the adoption of the audited financial statements for FY26 pass.

The company disclosed the voting results on September 13, 2026, confirming that while promoters voted unanimously in favor of all agenda items, significant opposition from public non-institutional shareholders led to the rejection of critical governance and leadership proposals.

Voting Results Overview

The total number of shareholders on the record date was 3,825. Of these, 10,311,408 votes were polled across all resolutions, representing approximately 72.2% of outstanding shares. The promoter group held 3,891,085 shares and voted 100% in favor of every resolution. Public institutional shareholders held 10,100 shares but did not cast any votes.

The decisive factor in the outcomes was the voting pattern of public non-institutional shareholders, who held 10,380,570 shares. This group demonstrated strong dissent against management proposals regarding board composition and executive appointments.

Failed Resolutions

Three special resolutions and one ordinary resolution failed to pass:

• Re-appointment of Mr. Mitesh M. Pujara: The ordinary resolution to re-appoint Mr. Pujara as a director retiring by rotation failed. It received 48.38% support overall, falling short of the simple majority required. Public non-institutional shareholders voted against it by a margin of 82.91%.
• Appointment of Managing Director: The special resolution to appoint Mr. Mahesh N. Pujara as Managing Director for three years failed with 50.51% support. A special resolution requires at least 75% approval. Public non-institutional shareholders opposed it by 81.67%.
• Re-appointment of Independent Director: The special resolution to re-appoint Mr. Mahesh Shah as Non-Executive Independent Director for five years also failed with 50.51% support. Public non-institutional shareholders voted against it by 81.67%.
• Re-appointment of Whole-Time Director: The special resolution to re-appoint Mr. Mitesh M. Pujara as Whole-Time Director for three years failed with 48.38% support. Public non-institutional shareholders opposed it by 82.91%.

Passed Resolution

The only resolution to pass was the ordinary resolution to adopt the Audited Financial Statements for the financial year ended March 31, 2026, along with the reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors. This proposal secured 62.93% support from votes polled, driven by unanimous promoter backing and partial support from public non-institutional shareholders (40.46% in favor).

What the Numbers Show

The voting data reveals a sharp divergence between promoter and public shareholder interests. While the promoter group, holding approximately 27.2% of the equity (3,891,085 shares out of 14,281,755 total), supported all management proposals, public non-institutional shareholders actively rejected four of the five items. The failure of the re-appointment of Mr. Mitesh M. Pujara as a director by rotation is particularly notable, as it is an ordinary resolution requiring only a simple majority, yet it still fell short due to overwhelming opposition from the public segment. This suggests significant governance friction or dissatisfaction among retail and institutional public investors regarding the current board structure or executive compensation/appointments.