A Project Report on

“A Comprehensive Analysis of Indian Financial Systems: Challenges & Opportunities In the

21st Century”

SUBMITED TO
School of Commerce and Management
YASHWANTRAO CHAVAN MAHARASHTRA OPEN UNIVERSITY,
Nashik.

AS PARTIAL FULLFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

MASTER OF BUSINEES ADMINISTRATION (MBA)

BY: DIXIT OMKAR SANATKUMAR

PRN: 2021017000050982

Under The Guidance of

Dr. Sandip V. Tile
(M.A., [Link]. NET. SET., Ph.D)
Assistant Professor
Department of Economics
K.T.H.M. College, Nashik

Study Centre
YCMOU, Study Centre (5404A)
K.T.H.M. College, Nashik

1
 Declaration by the Candidate

I declare that the thesis entitled “ A comprehensive Analysis of Indian

Financial System : Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century” submitted
by me for the degree of Master of Business Management under the guidance of
Dr. [Link] and has not formed the basis for the award of any degree, diploma,
associate chip, fellowship, titles in this or any other University or other
institution of Higher learning.
I further declare that the material obtained from other sources has been
duly acknowledge in the thesis

Date:
(Research Student)

2
 Certificate of the Guide

CERTIFIED that work incorporated in the thesis “A comprehensive analysis of

Indian Financial Systems: Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century”
submitted by Dixit Omkar Sanatkumar was carried out by the candidate under
my supervision/guidance. Such material has been obtained from other sources
has been duly acknowledge in the thesis.

Place: Nashik
Date:
Dr. [Link]
(Research Guide)

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I take this opportunity to thanks the management for allowing being
associated with the organization the hence exposing me to its unique culture
which has helped me immensely in enriching and gaining a valuable insight in
to the practical aspect of “A Comprehensive analysis of Indian Financial
System: Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st century”
My heartfelt gratitude goes to my project guide Dr. [Link] without
whose active guidance my work could have not been completed I am highly
indebted to Dr. [Link] for assigning me this project and for his help,
cooperation, guidance, advice, suggestion and encouragement without which
the project would not have been possible.

Dixit Omkar Sanatkumar

4
 INDEX

Sr Page
Particular
No. no
I Declaration by candidate 1
II Certificate of Guide 2
III Acknowledgement 3
Chapter 1 : India’s Financial system overview
1.1 Introduction 8
1.2 The Indian Economy – A brief History 8
1.3 Indian Economy and Financial markets since liberalization 9
1.3.1 The Domestic Economy 10
1.3.2 The External sector and the outside world 10
1.4 The Financial sector 11
1.5 Liberalising India’s Financial Sector: Constraints, Challenges and prospects 13
1.5.1 Pre-Reform Financial systems in India and rationale for reforms 17
1.5.2 Salient features of the reform 17
1.5.3 Critical aspects of Financial sector liberalisation in India 21
1.5.4 Performance of the financial sector 23
1.5.5 Indian Financial sector in the global context 25
1.6 Challenges Ahead 28
1.6.1 Challenges in the banking sector 30
1.6.2 Development Challenges 30
Chapter 2 – Research Methodology 32
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Significance of the research topic 37
2.3 Statement of problem 39
2.4 Scope of the study 41
2.5 Objectives of the study 43
2.6 Universe and Sample 46
2.7 Justification of sampling method 47
2.8 Sample selection 49

5
2.9 Research Hypothesis 51
2.10 Research model 52
2.11 Data Collection 54
2.12 Data analysis 56
2.13 Limitation of the study 59
Chapter – 3 Review of Literature for The Institutional Environment in 61
India – An assesment
3.1 Law, Institution and Business Environment
3.2 Financial/ Business laws and regulation in India 63
3.3 Stock Exchange in India 65
3.4 Enforcing corporate Governance laws 67
3.5 Indian Courts- An assesment 68
3.6 The small and medium enterprise sector in India 69
Chapter 4 – Capital markets 70
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Institutional Features 71
4.3 Debt market 72
4.4 Derivatives market 73
4.5 Recent FII flows in India 75
4.6 A few stylized facts about FII flows in India 76
Chapter 5- Banking sector 77
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Performance of Commercial banks in recent years 79
5.2.1 A brief background 80
5.2.2 Corporate governance 81
5.3 Corporate governance in India 83
5.3.1 A historical Background 84
5.3.2 Recent development in Corporate governance in India 84
5.3.2 Clause 49 of listing agreement 85
5.3.4 Recent findings about corporate governance in India 86
5.4 Microfinance in India 88
5.5 Outreach and recent growth 91

6
5.6 The performance of the larger MFIs in India 92
5.7 Financing of MFIs in India 94
5.7.1 Commercial Banks 95
5.7.2 Venture Capital Funds 95
5.8 The regulatory Environment 96
Chapter 6 – Data analysis and Interpretation 97
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Questionnaire based analysis 99
6.3 Analysis based on operational performance 100
6.4 Analysis based on financial performance 101
6.5 Analysis based on market perfomance 104
Chapter 7 – Findings, Conclusions and Suggestions 106
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Findings of the study 110
7.2.1 Findings Based on Descriptive statistics 110
7.2.2 Findings Based on Chi Square test statistics 113
7.3 Hypothesis testing 116
7.4 Recommendations 118
7.5 Conclusion 121
7.6 Scope for future Research 122

7
CHAPTER 1 - India's Financial System Overview

1.1 ITRODUCTION
One of the major economic developments of this decade has been the recent takeoff of India,
with growth rates averaging in excess of 8% for the last four years, a stock market that has
risen over three-fold in as many years with a rising inflow of foreign investment. In 2006,
total equity issuance reached $19.2bn in India, up 22 per cent. Merger and acquisition volume
was a record $27.8bn, up 38 per cent, driven by a371 percent increase in outbound
acquisitions exceeding for the first time in bound deal volumes Debt issuance reached an all-
time high of $13.7bn, up 28 per cent from a year earlier .Indian companies were also among
the world's most active issuers of depositary receipts in the first half of 2006, accounting for
one in three new issues globally, according to the Bank of New York. The questions and
challenges that India faces in the first decade of the new Millenniums are therefore
fundamentally different from those that it has wrestled with for decades after independence.
Liberalization and globalization have breathed new life into the foreign exchange markets
while simultaneously besetting them with new challenges. Commodity trading, particularly
trade in commodity futures, have practically started from scratch to attain scale and attention.
The banking industry has moved from an era of rigid controls and government interference to
a more market-governed system. New private banks have made their presence felt in a very
strong way and several foreign Banks have entered the country. Over the years, microfinance
has emerged as an important element of the Indian financial system increasing its outreach
and providing much-needed financial services to millions of poor Indian households.

8
1.2 The Indian Economy -- A Brief History

The second most populated country in the world (1.11 billion), India currently has the fourth
largest economy in PPP terms, and is closing in at the heels of the third largest economy,
Japan. At independence from the British in 1947, India inherited one of the world’s poorest
economies (the manufacturing sector accounted for only one tenth of the national product),
but also one with arguably the best formal financial markets in the developing world, with
four functioning stock exchanges (the oldest redating the Tokyo Stock Exchange) and clearly
defined rules governing listing, trading and settlements; a well-developed equity culture if
only among the urban rich; a banking system with clear lending norms and recovery
procedures; and better corporate laws than most other erstwhile colonies. The 1956 Indian
Companies Act, as well as other corporate laws and laws protecting the investors‟ rights,
were built on this foundation. After independence, a decades-long turn towards socialism put
in place a regime and culture of licensing, protection and widespread red-tape breeding
corruption. In 1990-91 India faced a severe balance of payments crisis ushering in an era
of reforms comprising deregulation, liberalization of the external sector
and partial privatization of some of the state sector enterprises. For about three decades
after independence, India grew at an average rate of 3.5% (infamously labelled “the Hindu
rate of growth”) and then accelerated to an average of about 5.6% since the1980‟s. The
growth surge actually started in the mid-1970s except for a disastrous single year, 1979-80.
As we have seen in Table 1.1, the annual GDP growth rate (based on inflation adjusted,
constant prices) of 5.9% during 1990-2005 is the second highest among the world’s largest
economies
Behind only China’s 10.1%.
In 2004, 52% of India’s GDP was generated in the services sector, while
Manufacturing (agriculture) produced 26% (22%) of GDP. In terms of employment,
however, agriculture still accounts for about two-thirds of the half a billion labour force,
indicating both poor productivity and wide spread under employment. Over 90% of the
Labour force works in the “unorganized sector.”

9
 GDP (Rs Crore)
20000000
18000000
16000000
14000000
12000000
10000000
8000000 GDP (Rs Crore)
6000000
4000000
2000000
0

1.3 Indian Economy and Financial Markets since liberalization

1. 3 . 1 Th e Do me st i c E con o my
There is hardly a facet of economic life in India that has not been radically altered since the
launch of economic reforms in the early 90‟s. The twin forces of
Globalization and the deregulation have breathed a new life to private business and the long-
protected industries in India are now faced with both the challenge of foreign competition as
well as the opportunities of world markets. The growth rate has continued the higher
trajectory started in 1980 and the GDP has nearly doubled in constant prices. The end of the
“Licenser Rag” has removed major obstacles from the path of new investment and capacity
creation.. The unmistakable ascent in the ratio following liberalization points to
the unshackled private sector’s march towards attaining the “commanding heights” of the
economy. In terms of price stability, the average rate of inflation since liberalization has
stayed close to the preceding half decade except in the last few years when inflation has
declined to significantly lower levels .Perhaps the biggest structural change in India’s macro
-economy, apart from the rise in the growth rate, is the steep decline in the interest rates.
Interest rates have fallen to almost half in the period following the reforms, bringing down

10
the corporate cost of capital significantly and increasing the competitiveness of Indian
companies in the global marketplace.

1.3.2The External Sector and the Outside World

Along with deregulation, globalization has played a key role in transforming the Indian
economy in the past dozen years.
A quick measure of the rise in India’s integration with the world economy is a standard gauge
of “openness” – the importance of foreign trade in the national income. The unmistakable rise
in the share of imports and exports in India’s GDP since 1990-91. In just over a decade since
Liberalization, the share of foreign trade in India’s GDP had increased by over 50%.While
imports increased steadily and continued to exceed exports, the rise in the latter has been
almost proportional as well. The “export pessimism” that marked India’s foreign trade policy
truly appears to be a thing of the past. While trade deficits have continued after liberalization,
foreign investment in India, both portfolio flows as well as FDI, (and more recently in the
form of external commercial borrowing (ECBs) by Indian firms) have been substantial. Both
kinds of flows have shown remarkable growth rates with comparable average levels over the
years. However the portfolio flows have been much more volatile as compared to FDI flows.
This raises the familiar concerns over “hot money” flows into the country with portfolio
flows. As for FDI, perhaps much of the potential still lays untapped. A recent study by
Morgan Stanley holds “bureaucracy, poor infrastructure, rigid labour laws and an
unfavourable tax structure” in India as responsible for this poor relative performance.
Nevertheless this difference should be viewed more as indicative of future growth
opportunities in FDI inflows provided India properly carries out its second generation
reforms and should not obscure India’s significant achievement in attracting foreign
investment in the years since liberalization. As a result of substantial capital inflows, the
foreign exchange reserves situation for India has improved beyond the wildest imagination of
any pre-liberalization policy maker. Today the Reserve Bank has a foreign exchange reserve
exceeding two hundred billion US dollars, a situation unthinkable at the beginning
of liberalization when India barely had reserves to cover a few weeks of imports..The Indian
rupee has largely stabilized against major world currencies, over the period. The economic
reforms era began with a sharp devaluation of the rupee. As liberalization lifted controls on
the rupee in the trade account, there were considerable concerns about its value. However,
propped up largely by inflows of foreign investment the floating rupee stabilized in the

11
late 90‟s and has appreciated somewhat against the US dollar in recent months. In fact, it is
fair to say that the rupee is currently considerably undervalued against the dollar as its value
is managed by the RBI.
A lot has changed in the world beyond India’s borders during these years. Japan, the second
largest economy in the world, has experienced a deep and long recession over much of the
period. The Asian Crisis, one of the most widespread of all financial and currency crises ever,
devastated South-East As in and Korea in 1997. Continental Europe has entered into
a monetary union creating the Euro that now rivals the US dollar in importance as a world
currency. Several economies like Russia, Argentina and Turkey have witnessed financial
crises. The internet bubble took stock markets in the US and several other countries to
dizzying heights before crashing back down. More recently, US sub-prime market woes have
sparked global sell-offs. India has appeared largely unscathed from the Asian crisis. Most
observers attribute this insulation to the capital controls that continue in India. Nevertheless,
Indian financial markets have progressively become more attuned to international market
forces. The reaction of Indian markets to the recent sub-prime meltdown bears testimony to
the level of financial integration between India and the rest of the world.

Foreign Trade ( in Billion $)

1000
900
800
700
600
500 Exports

400 Imports

300
200
100
0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2021 2022 2023

12
1.4 The Financial Sector

Despite the history of India’s stock exchanges (4 at independence to 23 today)

And the large number of listed firms (over 10,000), the size and role in terms of allocating
resources of the markets are dominated by those of the banking sector, similar to many other
emerging economies. The equity markets were not important as a source of funding for the
non-state sector until as recently as the early 1980s.
The ratio of India’s market Capitalization to GDP rose from about 3.5% in the early
1980‟s to over 59 % in 2005, which ranks 40th among 106 countries while the size of the
(private) corporate bond market is small. On the other hand, from The efficiency of the
banking sector, measured by the concentration and overhead costs, is above the world
average.
In a series of seminal papers beginning in the late 1990s,
La Portal, Lopez de Silages, Shellfire and Vishnu (LLSV) have empirically demonstrated the
effects that the investor protection embedded in the legal system of a country has on the
development and nature of financial systems in the country. Broadly speaking, they posit that
common-law countries provide better investor protection than civil law countries leading to
“better” financial and systemic outcomes for the former including a greater fraction of
external finance, better developed financial markets and more dispersed shareholding in these
countries as compared to the civil law countries. Consequently, the LLSV averages
of financial system indicators across different legal system groups serve as a benchmark
against which an individual country’s financial system can be compared. In terms of the size
(bank private credit over GDP), India’s banking sector is much smaller than the (value-
weighted) average of LLSV sample countries, even though its efficiency (overhead cost
as fraction of total banking assets) compares favourably to most countries.
The size of India’s stock market, measured by the total market capitalization as fraction of
GDP, is actually slightly larger than that of the banking sector, although this figure is still
below the LLSV average. However, in terms of the “floating supply” of the market, or the
tradable fraction of the total market capitalization, India’s stock market is only half of its
banking sector. “Structure activity” and “Structure size” measure whether a financial system
is dominated by the market or banks. India’s activity (size) figure is below (above)
even the average of English origin countries, suggesting that India has a market-dominated
system; but this is mainly due to the small amount of bank private credit(relative to GDP)

13
rather than the size of the stock market. In terms of relative efficiency (“Structure
efficiency”) of the market vs. banks, India’s banks are much more efficient than the market
(due to the low overhead cost), and this dominance of banks over market is stronger in India
than for the average level of LLSV countries. Finally, in terms of the development of the
financial system, including both banks and markets, we find that India’s overall financial
Market size (“Finance activity” and “Finance size”) is much smaller than the LLSV-sample
average level. Overall, based on the above evidence, we can conclude that both India’s stock
market and banking sector are small relative to the size of its economy, and the financial
system is dominated by an efficient (low overhead cost) but significantly under-utilized (in
terms of lending to non-state sectors) banking sector. However, the situation has changed
considerably in recent years: Since the middle of 2003 through to the third quarter of
2007, Indian stock prices have appreciated rapidly. In fact, as shown in Figure 1, the rise of
the Indian equity market in this period allowed investors to earn a higher return (“buy
and hold return”) from investing in the Bombay Stock Exchange, or BSE‟s SENSEX Index
than from investing in the S&P 500 Index and other indices in the U.K., and Japan during the
period. Only China did better. Many credit the continuing reforms and more or less
steady growth as well as increasing foreign direct and portfolio investment in the country for
this explosion in share values. The two major Indian exchanges, the Bombay Stock Exchange
(BSE), and the much more recent, National Stock Exchange, (NSE)) vis-à-vis other largest
stock market in the world in terms of market capitalization, while NSE ranked eighteenth.
The trading in the BSE is one of the most concentrated among the largest exchanges in the
world, with the top 5% of companies (in terms of market velocity of BSE (35.4% for the
year) is much lower than that of exchanges with similar concentration ratios. Figure 1.9
shows that Indian markets outperformed most major global markets handsomely during
1992-2006 period. In 2004-05, non-government Indian companies raised $2.7 billion from
the Market through the issuance of common stocks, and $378 million by selling
Bonds/debentures (no preferred shares). Despite the size of new issues, India’s financial
markets, relative to the size of its economy and population, are much smaller than those in
many other countries. A comparison of external markets (stock and bonds) in India and
different country groups (by legal origin) using measures from LLSV 1997a). The degree of
protection of investors based on the data used in the horizontal axis measures overall investor
protection (protection provided by the law, rule of law, and government corruption) in
each country, while the vertical axis measures the (relative) size and efficiency of that
country’s external markets. Most countries with the English common-law origin (French

14
civil-law origin) lie in the top-right region (bottom-left with relatively strong legal protection
(in particular, protection provided by law) but relatively small financial markets.

Indian Stock market Returns in %

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020

The Financial Sector

Along with the rest of the economy and perhaps even more than the rest, financial markets in
India have witnessed a fundamental transformation in the years since liberalization. The
going has not been smooth all along but the overall effects have been largely positive. Over
the decades, India’s banking sector has grown steadily in size (in terms of total deposits) at an
average annual growth rate of 18%. There are about 100 commercial the rest 40 foreign
banks. Still dominated by state-owned banks (they account for over 80% of deposits and
assets), the years since liberalization have seen the emergence of new private sector banks as
well as the entry of several new foreign banks. This has resulted in a much lower

15
concentration ratio in India than in other emerging economies. Competition has clearly
increased with the index (a measure of concentration) for advances and assets dropping by
over 28% and about 20% respectively between 1991-1992 and [Link] a decade of
its formation, a private bank, the ICICI Bank has become the second largest in India. As
compared to most Asian countries the Indian banking system has done better in managing its
NPL problem. The “healthy” status of the Indian banking system is in part due to its high
standards in selecting borrowers (in fact, many firms complained about the stringent
standards and lack of sufficient funding), though there is some concern about
“Ever -greening” of loans to avoid being categorized as [Link] terms of profitability. Indian
banks have also performed well compared to the banking sector in other Asian economies, as
the returns to bank assets and equity in Table 1.6 convey. Private banks are today
increasingly displacing nationalized banks from their positions of pre-eminence. Though
the nationalized State Bank of India (SBI)remains the largest bank in the country by far, new
private banks like ICICI Bank, UTI Bank (recently renamed Axis Bank) and HDFC Bank
have emerged as important players in the retail banking sector. Though spawned by
government- backed financial institutions in each case, they are profit-driven professional
enterprises. The proportion of non-performing assets (NPAs) in the loan portfolios of the
banks are one of the best indicators of the health of the banking sector, which in turn, is
central to the economic health of the nation. Clearly the foreign banks have the healthiest
portfolios and the nationalized banks the worst, but the downward trend across the board is
indeed a positive feature. Also, while there is still room for improvement, the overall ratios
are far from alarming particularly when while the banking sector has undergone several
changes, equity markets have experienced tumultuous times as well. There is no doubt that
the post-reforms era has witnessed considerably higher average stock market returns in
general as compared to before. Since the beginning of the reforms, “equity culture” has
Spread across the country to an extent more than ever before. Although GDP itself has risen
faster than before, the long-term growth in equity markets has been significantly higher.

16
1.5 Liberalising India’s Financial Sector Constraints, Challenges and
Prospects
Following the unprecedented macroeconomic and balance of payments crisis in 1991,
a comprehensive program of macroeconomic stabilisation and structural adjustment was
undertaken in India. Early on in this reform process, financial sector reform was initiated in
1992-93. My speech today reviews the challenges and constraints in liberalising India's
financial sector and makes an assessment of its future prospects. The speech is organised as
follows: First, I shall present a brief historical background and rationale for financial sector
reform. This is followed by a discussion of main features of the reform and its critical
aspects. Against that backdrop, Section an evaluation of the performance of India's financial
sector will be made. This will be followed by an analysis of the performance of India's
financial sector in the global context. Finally, I shall try to identify the challenges that lay
ahead for India's financial sector
.

1.5.1 PRE-REFORM FINANCIAL SYSTEM IN INDIA AND RATIONALE

FOR REFORMS

The Indian financial sector today is significantly different from what it used to be in the
1970s and 1980s. The Indian financial system of the pre reform period essentially catered to
the needs of planned economic development in a mixed-economy framework where the
Government sector had a predominant role in economic activity. Fiscal activism was resorted
to kick start economic growth was evidenced in took the forms of large developmental
expenditures by the public sector, much of it to finance long gestation projects requiring
long-term finance(Reddy, 2000). This necessitated large borrowings by the Government. In
order to facilitate the large borrowing requirements of the Government, interest rates on
Government securities were artificially pegged at low levels, quite unrelated to market
conditions. The accommodative fiscal stance had to be supported by issuances of ad hoc
treasury bills (issued on tap at 4.6 per cent) leading to high levels of monetisation of fiscal
deficit during the major part of the 1980s. With a view to check the monetary effects of such
large-scale monetisation, the cash reserve ratio (CRR) was increased frequently to control
liquidity. The financial sector prior to the 1990swas thus characterised by segmented

17
and underdeveloped financial markets coupled with paucity of instruments and there existed a
complex structure of interest rates arising from economic and social concerns of providing
directed and concessional credit to certain sectors, ensuing “cross subsidisation” among
borrowers. For maintaining spreads of banking sector, regulation of both deposit and lending
rates resulted not only in distorting the interest rate mechanism, but also adversely affected
the viability and profitability of banks. The lack of recognition of the importance
of transparency, accountability and prudential norms in the operations of the banking system
led also to a rising burden of non- performing assets. As Reddy (2000) has observed,
there was a de facto joint family balance sheet of Government, RBI and commercial banks,
with transactions between the three segments being governed by plan priorities rather than
sound principles of financing. The policies pursued did have many benefits, though such
benefits came at a higher cost. The phase was characterised by significant branch expansion
to mobilise savings and there was a visible increase in the flow of bank credit to important
sectors like agriculture, small-scale industries, and exports. However, these achievements co-
existed with emergence of macro-economic imbalances such as the persistent fiscal deficits
and inefficient functioning of the financial sector. Excessive concentration of financial
resources was contained to a significant extent. Importantly, there was no major episode
of failure of financial intermediaries during this period. The state of the financial sector in
India thus, resembled the classic case of “financial repression” a la propounded by
MacKinnon and Shaw .The sector was characterised, inter alia, by administered interest
rates, large pre-emption of resources by the State and extensive micro-regulations directing
the major portion of the flow of funds to and from the financial sector. The regulatory regime
prior to the 1990s led to (i) inefficiencies in the financial system, (ii) underdeveloped
financial markets serving as a captive market for resource requirement by the State, iii) very
little product choice in all segments of the financial market, iv) low level of liquidity in the
securities market. New equity issues were governed by extensive regulations. There was pre-
emption of resources in government debt market to fulfil high statutory reserve requirements
and limited depth in the foreign exchange market as most such transactions were governed by
inflexible and low limits besides approval requirements. These, in turn, resulted in low levels
of competition, efficiency and productivity in the financial sector. Accordingly, the main
objectives of the financial sector reform process in India initiated in the early 1990s have
been to: First, getting rid of the complexities created by excessive regulation and financial
repression with a view to create an atmosphere conducive to the emergence of an efficient,
productive and profitable financial sector industry; Second, enabling the growth of financial

18
markets that would enable price discovery, in particular, determination of interest rates by the
market dynamics that then helps in efficient allocation of resources; Third, to provide
operational and functional autonomy to institutions to facilitate the growth of a healthy and
robust financial system; Fourth, opening up the external sector in a calibrated fashion so
that the domestic sector could withstand the challenges from international financial system
(Reddy, 1998).Fifth, the financial sector reforms were guided by the desire to prepare the
financial entities to effectively deal with the impulses arising from the developments in the
global economy by promoting measures of financial stability, which emerged as an important
objective of monetary policy along with price stability and economic growth; and As
financial markets grew in size, especially since the late 1990s, the dominant fear of market
failure receded, the process of financial sector reforms saw a decisive shift towards market-
oriented strategies, enabling price discovery through deepening of the financial system with
multiple and diverse financial entities of different risk profiles.

19
 CSR RATIOS

1990s: 6% in 1980-81 to 15%

2000: 10.5% in 1999 to 10.0%

2008: 7.5% in 2007 to 7.75%

2010: 7.75% in 2008 to 6.00%

2015: 6.00% in 2010 to 5.00%

2020: 5.00% in 2015 to 4.00%

20
 SLR RATIOS

1990s: Increased by 38.5%

1997: Lowered by 25%

2020 : Currently 18 %

1.5.2 SALIENT FEATURES OF THE REFORM

The first phase of current reform of financial sector was initiated in1992, based on
the recommendations of Committee on Financial System (CFS or Narasimham
Committee).The initiation of financial reforms in the country during the early 1990s was to a
large extent conditioned by the analysis and recommendations of various
Committees/Working Groups set-up to address specific issues. The process has been marked
by „gradualism‟ with measures being undertaken after extensive consultations with experts
and market participants. From the beginning of financial reforms, India has resolved to that
the international best practices. The salient features of the financial sector reforms in India so
far include the following: First, financial sector reforms (FSR) were undertaken as
part of overall economic reform. Second, while the reform process itself commenced in India
well after many developing countries undertook reform, FSR were undertaken early in the
reform cycle. Third, these were orderly as designed taking into account the prevailing
circumstances. Fourth, the reforms have brought about some efficiency, as for example

21
evidenced by recent reduction in interest spreads or increasing trend in household savings,
especially financial savings. Fifth, the financial system and in particular the banking system
displays continued stability relative to other countries. While during the initial stages of the
FSR, India was often criticised as being far too gradual, the financial crisis in the recent years
Which have afflicted a number of developing countries, not to talk about some developed
countries, have shown the merits of India’s gradual reforms? Finally, the progress that has
been made in a substantial yet non-disruptive manner, has given confidence to launch what
has been described as second generation or second phase of reforms - especially in the
banking sector. The Reserve Bank's approach to reform in financial sector could be
summarised as pancha-sutra or five principles (Reddy, 1998).First, cautious and proper
sequencing of various measures Giving adequate time to the various agents to undertake the
necessary norms; e.g., the gradual introduction of prudential norms. Second, mutually
reinforcing measures, that as a package would been abling reform but non-disruptive of the
confidence in the system, e.g., combining reduction in refinance with reduction in the
cash reserve ratio(CRR) which obviously improved bank profitability Third,
complementarily between reforms in banking sector and changes in fiscal, external and
monetary policies, especially in terms of co-ordination with Government; e.g.,
recapitalisation of Government owned banks coupled with prudential regulation; abolition of
ad hoc Treasury bills and its replacement with a system of Ways and Means Advances,
coupled with reforms in debt markets.
Fourth, developing financial infrastructure in terms of supervisory body, audit standards,
technology and legal framework; e.g., establishment of Board for Financial Supervision,
setting up of the Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology, legal
amendment to the RBI Act on Non- Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs).Fifth, taking
initiatives to nurture, develop and integrate money, debt and forex markets, in a way that all
major banks have an opportunity to develop skills, participate and benefit; e.g., gradual
reduction in the minimum period for maturity of term deposits and permitting banks to
determine the penalty structure in respect of premature withdrawal, syndication in respect
of loans, flexibility to invest in money and debt market instruments, greater freedom to banks
to borrow from and invest abroad.

22
1.5.3 CRITICAL ASPECTS OF FINANCIAL SECTOR LIBERALISATION IN INDIA

Financial sector liberalisation in India has been calibrated on cautious and appropriate
sequencing of reform measures and was marked by a gradual opening up of the economy.
This gradualist strategy seemed to have served the country well, in terms of aiding growth,
avoiding crises, enhancing efficiency and imparting resilience to the system. From the
vantage point of 2005, one of the successes of the Indian financial sector reform has been the
maintenance of financial stability and avoidance of any major financial crisis since early
1990s – a period that has been turbulent for the financial sector in most emerging market
countries. The process of financial liberalisation has resulted in innovations in instruments
and processes, technological sophistication and increased capital flows. In order to fulfil
the broad objectives of the financial liberalisation in India, a multi-pronged approach was
adopted. This included removing the constraints facing the financial system through the
creation of an enabling policy environment; improving the functioning of the financial
institutions, and through the pursuit of financial stability as an essential ingredient
of macroeconomic stability (Reddy, 2004; Mohan, 2004b).As the Indian financial sector
stands at a crucial juncture today, it may be instructive to look back at some of the important
steps taken in the last few years. Unshackling the financial system from excessive controls
constituted an important element of financial liberalisation in India. This was necessary
to enable the financial sector to perform efficiently and attain its true potential. To this end,
major reform measures undertaken may be summed up as follows: First, there was an
increasing realisation that pre-emption of banks‟ resources to finance Government’s
budgetary needs through administered Interest rates was a binding constraint to efficient
functioning of the banking sector, structurally the dominant segment of the Indian financial
system. Removal of these constraints meant a planned reduction in statutory pre emption and
a gradual deregulation of interest rate prescriptions. In the early
1990s, as much as 63.5 per cent of bank's resources were pre-empted by the use of cash
reserve ratio (CRR) and statutory liquidity ratio (SLR). Since the introduction of financial
sector reforms, the SLR has been reduced to a statutory minimum of 25 per cent while CRR
has been reduced to 5 per cent. The medium-term objective of reducing CRR has to take
account of money supply considerations and also the objectives of exchange rate
stabilisation. .Also, the Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR) has been gradually brought down
from an average effective rate of 37.4 in 1992 to the statutory minimum of per cent at
present. Second, the complex structure of administered interest rates has been almost totally

23
dismantled. Prescriptions of rates on all term deposits, including conditions of premature
withdrawal, and offering uniform rate irrespective of size of deposits have been dispensed
with. There is a differentiated interest rate ceiling prescribed for foreign
currency denominated deposits from non-resident Indians, and such ceiling will have to
continue as part of managing external debt flows, especially short-term flows till fuller
liberalisation of capital account. Lending rates for different categories, which were earlier
prescribed, have been gradually abolished but transparency is insisted upon. Third, since the
onset of the reforms process, monetary management in terms of framework and instruments
has undergone significant changes, reflecting broadly the transition of the economy from
a regulated to liberalized and deregulated regime. Reflecting the development of financial
markets and the opening up of the economy, the use of broad money as an intermediate target
has been de-emphasised, although the growth in broad money (M3) continues to be used as
an important indicator of monetary policy. The composition of reserve money has also
changed with net foreign exchange assets currently accounting for nearly one-half. A
multiple indicator approach was adopted in 1998-99, where in interest rates or rates of return
in different markets (money, capital and Government securities markets) along with such
data as on currency, credit extended by banks and financial institutions, fiscal position, trade,
capital flows, inflation rate, exchange rate, refinancing and transactions in foreign exchange
available on high frequency basis are juxtaposed with output data for drawing policy
perspectives. Such a shift was gradual and a logical outcome of measures taken over the
reform period since the early 1990s (Reddy, 2001).Fourth, there has been a sea change in
the functioning of financial markets in India since the onset of financial liberalization. The
responsibility of the Reserve Bank in undertaking reform in the financial markets has been
driven mainly by the need to improve the effectiveness of the transmission channel of
monetary policy. The development of financial markets have therefore, encompassed
regulatory and legal changes, building up of institutional infrastructure, constant fine-tuning
in market microstructure and massive up gradation of technological infrastructure. Since the
onset of reforms, a major focus of architectural policy efforts has been on the principal
components of the organised financial market spectrum: the money market, which is central
to monetary policy, the credit market, which is essential for flow of resources to the
productive sectors of the economy, the capital market, or the market for long-term capital
funds, the Government securities market which is significant from the point of view of
developing a risk-free credible yield curve and the foreign exchange market, which is integral
to external sector management. Along with the steps taken to improve the functioning of

24
these markets, there has been a concomitant strengthening of the regulatory framework.
Furthermore, the Reserve Bank has achieved considerable success in attaining monetary
stability through maintaining low and stable inflation. Since the second half of the 1990s,
inflation has been brought down to an average of five per cent per annum compared to an
average of around 8-9 per cent per annum in the preceding two and a half decades. The
reduction in inflation since the early 1990shas also enabled inflation expectations to stabilise.
Low and stable inflation expectations increase confidence in the domestic financial system
and, there by contribute in an important way to the stability of the domestic financial
system(Reddy, 2002).Fifth, as observed by Governor Reddy, contextually, financial stability
in India means (a) ensuring uninterrupted settlements of financial transactions(both internal
and external), (b) maintenance of a level of confidence in the financial system amongst all the
participants and stakeholders and (c) absence of excess volatility that unduly and adversely
affects real economic activity (Reddy,2004). The overall approach of the Reserve Bank to
maintain financial stability is three-pronged: maintenance of overall macroeconomic balance;
improvement in the macro-prudential functioning of institutions and markets; and
strengthening micro-prudential institutional soundness through regulation and supervision.

1.5.4 PERFORMANCE OF THE FINANCIAL SECTOR

Adducing to the success of banking sector reforms, the various parameters of performance
of banking sector has shown continuous improvement. The sources of income has
witnessed increasing share of noninterest income amidst declining interest rate, increasing
diversification of banks‟ portfolio and greater deepening of financial market. The share of
noninterest income comprises fees, trading income, and gains from exchange
Operations in banks ‟ total income has increased steadily from 9-10 per cent in early1990s to
about 22 per cent in 2003-04. On the expenditure side, there has been a containment of
overall expenditure accompanied mainly by decline in interest expenditure. The provisions
and contingencies, particularly, on account of non- performing loans have shown higher
growth due to tighter prudential norms in order to improve asset quality. The profitability of
banks has shown significant improvement, especially, during the last five years. During the
last two years in particular, despite lower interest rates, the banks have recorded a momentum
of high growth in profits of the range of 30-47 per cent attributing to improvement in asset
quality, better loan recovery, rising non-interest income, and containment of expenditure.
From cross- country perspective, India’s banking sector now belongs to the most profitable
category. The profitability [measured by return on assets (ROA)] of India’s banking sector at

25
1 per cent is comparable to some of the advanced countries including U.K. and the U.S.A.
The return on equity (ROE)indicator of banks provides information as to how banks
conduct business in the interest of shareholders has also shown improvement. The return on
equity (ROE)of the banking system, which was in the range of about 10-16 per cent during
the period 1998-99 to 2001-02, increased to about 19-20 per cent in 2003-04. The spread has
shown a sustained movement in the range of 2.8-2.9 per cent during2002-03 and 2003-04.
Banks have made substantial progress in cleaning off NPAs from their balance sheet
adducing to various institutional measures pertaining to one-time settlement, debt recovery,
asset reconstruction and securitisation, lok adalats, and corporate debt restructuring. Despite
the switchover to 90-daydelinquency norm with effect from March 2004, the gross and the
net NPAs of SCBs declined in absolute terms for the second year in succession and stood at
only 2.9 per cent as at end-March 2004 and further declined to 2.5 per cent as a ten-
September 2004. The Reserve Bank‟s thrust on adequate level of provisions is reflected in
the fact that the cumulative level of provisioning for the scheduled commercial banks works
out to 70.6 per cent of gross NPAs as at end-March [Link] achievement is notable
in comparison with the internationally prescribed benchmark of 50 per cent provisioning
against NPAs. The banking sector has shown sustained improvement in regard to solvency
and soundness as revealed from the capital adequacy requirement. The capital to risk
weighted assets ratio (CRAR) SCBs stood at 13 per cent in2003-04, above the regulatory
minimum of 9 per cent. In 2003-04, all but two commercial banks complied with the
regulatory minimum CRAR of 9 per cent. The two banks, which did not comply with the
regulatory minimum, accounted for a negligible 0.5 per cent of total assets of scheduled
commercial banks in [Link] other segments of the financial sector have also
witnessed improvement during the recent years. The scheduled co-operative banks registered
a net profit during 2003-04 as against losses in the previous year. The state co-operative
banks registered profit during recent years while the financial health of central co-operative
banks deteriorated. A large number of primary agricultural credit societies, however, faced
severe problems due to significant erosion of own funds, deposits and low recovery
rates. Various policies have been adopted to improve the financial health of the Primary
Agricultural Credit Societies (PACs) including extension of funds by NABARD to develop
the infrastructure of the PACs. Among All India Financial Institutions (AIFI), barring two
institutions facing financial and organizational restructuring all other institutions registered
positive operating and net profits. The business model of the AIFIs came under strain since
the withdrawal of the concessional sources of funds and imposition of restrictions on raising

26
short-term funds of maturity less than one year resulting in AIFIs raising high cost debt from
the market. The Non-Bank Financial Companies (NBFCs) sector has registered improved
profit in the current years along with a strengthening of the soundness indicators.

Growth of Banking in India of commercial Banks

Indicators 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

[Link] 284 218 178 169 166 163 163 169
[Link]
[Link] 70,373 72,072 74,653 78,787 82,897 88,203 94,019 102,377
Branches
Population 16 16 15 15 15 14 13 13
Per bank
Avg deposit 17,002 21,090 26,116 31,969 38,341 44,928 52,078 59,091
(billion)
Bank credit 11,004 15,081 19,312 23,619 27,755 32,448 39,421 46,119
Deposits 62% 64% 69% 73% 77% 78% 78% 78%
As % in
GNP
Per capita 16,281 19,190 23,382 28,610 33,919 39,107 45,505 50,183
deposit
Per capita 10,752 13,869 17,541 21,218 24,617 28,431 34,187 38,874
credit
Credit 63% 70% 74% 75% 74% 74% 76% 79%
deposit
ratio

27
1.5.5 INDIAN FINANCIAL SECTOR IN THE GLOBAL CONTEXT

Reflecting the growing credit needs and increasing levels of monetisation in the economy, the
ratio of money and quasi money to GDP in India increased continuously from 35.0 per cent
in 1981-85 to 57.9 per cent in2001-03. From a cross-country perspective India’s rank in terms
of the ratio of money and quasi money to GDP remained broadly unchanged at around 55th
within a sample of around 180 countries. However, at the current level, the ratio remained
substantially lower than the global average and also those for China, Korea and
major industrialised countries. Over the last two decades, the growth in money supply in
India remained remarkably stable at around 17 per cent. Money supply growth rate in the
country contrasts with the experience of the Latin American and East European emerging
market economies (EMEs). The stability in money supply growth played an important role in
the price stability of the country. It has been generally observed that due to structural
constraints including relatively lower levels of development of financial intermediaries and
markets, there exists substantial excess demand for credit in the developing countries. In line
with this, over the last two decades, the net domestic credit to GDP ratio in India remained
substantially lower than those in the industrialized countries. The ratio also remained lower
than that in China and Korea. However, at the aggregate level, in terms of net domestic credit
to GDP ratio, India ranked 63rdamong 175 countries, which indicate that the level of excess
credit demand in the Country is relatively modest. Moreover, over time, there has been
substantial improvement in the credit-GDP ratio in the country from44.5 per cent in 1981-85
to 56.8 per cent in 2001-03. This reflects deepening of the Indian financial sector. With the
introduction of the financial sector reforms in India, there has been substantial reduction in
the role of administered policies in deciding the distribution of credit across sectors.
Moreover, the level of pre-emption of credit by the government sector has also been reduced
substantially. Reflecting this, flow of credit to the private sector as a proportion of GDP
increased considerably from 24.1 per cent in 1991-95 to 31.2 per cent in [Link] the post-
liberalisation period, the ratio of domestic credit provided by the banks to GDP increased
from 49 per cent in 1991-95 to 57 per cent in 2001- [Link], during this period,
India’s relative ranking in the world improved from 91st to 80th. However, as in the case of
net domestic credit, credit from banking sector as a proportion of GDP in India remains much
less than the global average and the levels in China and most East Asian EMEs According to
the Indian Banks‟ Association Report on Banking Industry

28
Vision 2010, the presence of global players in the Indian financial system is likely to increase
and simultaneously some of the Indian banks would become global players in the coming
years. As the process of mergers and acquisition gathers momentum in the Indian banking
sector, some of the Indian banks may emerge as world-class banks with operations at the
global scale. Presently, there are twenty Indian banks including a private sector banks which
appear among the “Top 1000 World Banks” as listed by the London based magazine “The
Banker”. Among the top 100 global banks, India has only one bank, i.e., State Bank of India
(SBI) which ranks 82nd, whereas China has 4 banks in the top100. In terms of size, Indian
banks including SBI are far behind the top banks in the world. However, the financial
strength of the Indian banks is among the highest in Asia. Other segments of financial
market, particularly, Indian stock market is comparable to the international stock markets in
terms of turnover ratio. Presently, India has third largest investor base in the world. Indian
Stock market trading and settlement system are of world class. India has one of the world's
lowest transaction costs based on screen-based transactions, paperless trading and a T+2
settlements cycle. At the end of 2003, Standard and Poor’s (S&P) ranked India 17th in terms
of market capitalization (19th in 2002), 16th in terms of total value traded in stock exchanges
(17th in 2002) and 6th in terms of turnover ratio which is a measure of liquidity (7th in 2002).
India has the number two ranking in terms of listed securities on the exchanges second only
to the USA. Despite having a large number of listed companies on its stock exchanges, India
accounted for a meagre 0.96 per cent in total world turnover as compared to that of the US at
52.4 per cent of worldwide turnover in 2003. In terms of market capitalization, Indian
companies accounted for 0.87 per cent of the worldwide market capitalization while US
accounted for 44.7 per cent in 2003. These data, though quite impressive, do not reflect the
full Indian market, as S&P (even other international publications) does not cover the whole
market. For example, India has more than 9000 listed companies at the end of March 2004,
while S&P considers only 5,644 companies. If whole market were taken into consideration,
India’s position vis-à-vis other countries would be much better.

29
1.6 CHALLENGES AHEAD

1.6.1 CHALLENGES IN THE BANKING SECTOR

What strategies can be adopted by Indian financial sector to become and remain
globally competitive? While there is no single mantra to become globally
competitive, one can identify issues that merit attention: In the context of the banking
sector, there is the issue of consolidation, which is the current buzzword in the
banking industry worldwide. The largest bank in China with an asset base of over US
$400 billion. In contrast, the total assets of the largest two banks in India, one in
public sector and another private entity, are US $127 billion and US $29 billion.
These figures are quite illuminating and the onus is on Indian banks to take
cognisance of this fact. The Government has raised the cap on FDI in private banks.
The RBI has, on its part, suggested certain changes in the Banking Regulation
(Amendment) Bill, 2003 that seek to address some of the legal impediments arising in
the consolidation process. The second issue of import is that of management of costs.
Cost containment is a key to sustainability of bank profits as well as their long-term
viability. In 2003, operating costs of banks, expressed as per cent of total average
asset, was lower than 2 per cent in major European economies like Sweden, Austria,
Germany and France. In contrast, in 2003, operating costs of commercial banks in
India were 2.24 per cent of total assets. The downward stickiness continued in 2004
as operating costs have remained well above 2 per cent, as percentage of total assets.
Another related challenge is in reducing the cost of funds of the banking sector.
1) in tandem with the soft interest regime over the last few years, cost of funds of the
banking sector has been declining. The cost of funds of public sector banks, which
was 6.9 per cent in 1995-96, has since declined to 5.0 per cent in2003-04. Other bank
groups have also experienced concomitant declines. With the rise in oil prices and its
cascading effects on inflation along with the raising of policy rates by several central
banks, sooner or later, this reversal of the existing comfortable liquidity conditions is
likely to have ramifications on domestic financial markets, and with that, on the cost
of funds of banks as well. Diversification into fee-based activities coupled with
prudent asset liability management hold the key to future profitability. The issue of
credit delivery systems has come into focus of late. The persistence of divergence
between the informal and formal sector interest rates in effect has meant that,
with deregulation, the formal credit mechanisms have not been able to pierce the

30
 informal system. The differences in „apparent cost‟ and „total real cost‟ might be
an important factor behind this divergence.
2) Reducing the„ total real cost‟ in the formal sector is like ly to be an important
consideration to bring about a degree of convergence between the price of credit
between the formal and informal sectors. In recognition of this fact, the last several
Annual Policy Statements of the Governor have placed explicit emphasis on
streamlining credit delivery through a gamut of measures, including, among others,
widening the scope of infrastructure lending, revamping the rural credit delivery
system by envisaged restructuring of the rural banking segment, widening the
scope of priority sector lending, and the like.
3) The fourth issue is the management of sticky assets. This is a key to the stability and
continued viability of the banking sector. Although the ratios of nonperforming loans
to total assets are higher in comparison to international standards, the Indian banks
have done a remarkable job in containment of nonperforming loans (NPL) in recent
times. Non-performing loans to total loans of banks were 1.2 per cent in the US, 1.4
per cent in Canada and in the range of 2- 5 per cent in major European economies. In
contrast, the same for Indian banks was8.8 per cent. Gross NPL ratio for Indian
scheduled commercial banks declined to7.3 per cent in 2004 bearing testimony to the
serious efforts by our banking system to converge towards global benchmarks. The
fifth issue concerns the management of risks. Banking in modern Economies is all
about risk management. The successful negotiation and implementation of Basel II is
likely to lead to an even closer focus on risk measurement and risk management at the
institutional level. Thankfully, Basel II has, through their various publications,
provided useful guidelines on managing the various facets of risk. Institution of
sound risk management practices would be an important plank for staying ahead of
the growing competition. Over the past few years, the Reserve Bank has initiated
several steps to promote adequate risk management systems across market
participants. Among the measures that were instituted to insulate the financial
institutions from the vagaries of the market were gradual increase in the cushion
of capital, frequent revaluation of the portfolio based on market fluctuations,
increasing transparency and a framework for asset liability management (ALM) to
combat the risks facing the Indian financial Sector. The Reserve Bank has taken a
lead in providing guidance to banks by bringing out guidance notes on how
to identify, monitor, measure and control the various facets of risks. However, in the

31
 ultimate analysis, the onus is on the banks themselves to adopt an integrated risk
management approach, based on coherent risk models suited to their risk appetite,
business philosophy and expansion strategies. Such improved risk management
systems are not only crucial stepping stones towards Basel II but also are expected to
enable banks to shed their risk averse attitude and contributing more finance to
hitherto unbaked segments of agriculture, industry and services. It is important that
banks look at the expansion of the credit portfolio in a healthy way, particularly in the
background of higher industrial growth, new plans of corporate expansion and higher
levels of infrastructure financing. Improved risk management practices by financial
intuitions are the key to success in a competitive environment where new instruments
such as derivatives are introduced in a gradual and progressive manner.
Financial innovation provides opportunities and rewards to those with enterprise
and vision. But at the same time, it exposes them to increased risks. Unless market
participants institute sound risk management systems, holding trading positions
tantamount expose them to severe risks. Indeed, risk taking and risk management
must go hand in hand. The financial market needs players who are not afraid to
take contrarian positions, who search for unoccupied habitats to provide diversity,
provided they have adequate risk management systems in place. For market
participants, there is little room for complacency and there appears to be no choice but
to be pro-active in instituting appropriate risk management models. My view is
that early adoption in this regard makes sound business sense and may prove
immensely beneficial in a competitive financial sector.

1.6.2 DEVELOPMENTAL CHALLENGES

The return to high growth in 2003-04 has brought with it renewed business optimism and a
wider appreciation regarding India’s potential for growth. The industrial climate during
2004-05 reflects a revival of investment demand and building up of capacity. Both the capital
goods and intermediate goods sectors have recorded robust growth signifying the quickening
of investment activity. This has been supported by improved corporate profitability;
expansion in non-food credit and continuing optimism regarding production and export
growth. Resurgence of investment demand and buoyant external demand are likely to be
the main drivers of India’s growth process during 2004-05. A key issue in most fast growing
economies is how to ensure adequate availability of finance to support investment and

32
growth. Most countries rely on a combination of banking sector, other financial institutions
and capital market for channelizing funds to the corporate sector. Each country, however, has
its unique set of dilemmas in their financial sectors. India is no different in this respect. There
are several key issues, which are of particular relevance to India for the country to meet the
challenges of globalization:

2 INTER-LINKAGES AMONG FINANCIAL MARKETS

The first step towards globalisation is integration of various segments of the domestic
financial markets. The dream of all central banks is to see the various segments of financial
markets working in a smooth and well coordinated manner. Well-developed financial markets
help central banks to effectively conduct monetary policy with the use of market-based
instruments. These markets also generate appropriate reference rates for pricing
other financial assets. A necessary prerequisite for the smooth operation of the financial
markets is the integration of domestic markets so that impulses can flow smoothly across
different market segments and resource allocation process becomes more efficient. The inter-
linkages between money market, Government securities market and foreign exchange market
are now fairly well established. However, as in financial markets in other developing
economies, the capital markets in India are not yet fully integrated with the other segments of
the markets. While the extent of integration between capital market and other segments of
financial markets is much deeper in the developed economies, a consensus is yet to emerge
on the role that equity prices should play in monetary policy formulation. This is more so
because typically equity prices are more sensitive to “news” than to the underlying
“fundamentals”. In India, there have been some episodes of volatility spill over between
markets in times of uncertainty. In view of the progressive integration of various segments of
financial markets, the Reserve Bank keeps a close watch on activity in the equity market to
guard against any possible spill over of disturbances to the money, the Government securities
and the foreign exchange markets. In such situations, concerted policy response from the
regulators can contain to a great extent the risks of transmission of volatility. This is the first
crucial step towards being globally competitive.

33
3 CHALLENGES TO REGULATION AND SUPERVISION

As the Indian financial system undergo structural changes relating to ownership, competition
and integration with global financial markets, the necessity of an ongoing restructuring of the
regulatory framework and improved monitoring of the embedded risks in the financial system
has been recognized. The hallmark of Indian regulatory response has been its inclusive
approach through a consultative framework, increased emphasis on self regulation and
strengthening of market participants through measures of capital adequacy, corporate
governance and effective internal control mechanisms. Increasingly, on-site supervision is
being complemented by Risk based Supervision (RBS).Presently, the RBS has been used in
23 Banks on a pilot basis, but one can certainly visualize the extensive use of RBS by
regulators in India in the near future. In view of the complex nature of operation of financial
conglomerates, the Reserve Bank is putting in place appropriate supervisory strategies.
Regulatory initiatives also include consolidation of domestic banking sector; restructuring
of Development Finance Institutions; and appropriate timing for the significant entry of
foreign banks so as to be co terminus with the transition to greater capital account
convertibility while being consistent with our continuing obligation under the WTO
commitments. In respect of foreign banks, regulatory initiatives are directed at: choice of
the mode of presence, acceptable transition path, according national treatment, addressing
supervisory concerns, linkages between foreign banks and their presence in other (non-
banking) financial services.

4 IMPROVING PAYMENT AND SETTLEMENT SYSTEMS

Several efforts at reducing Settlement Risks have been undertaken in recent years. The
payment system in India has been considerably strengthened in2003-04 with the introduction
of Real time Gross Settlement System (RTGS), the Special Electronics Funds Transfer
System and the Online Tax Accounting System. Liquidity in the Government securities
market has been enhanced by the introduction of Delivery versus Payment (DvP III) mode
from April, [Link] value-free transfer of securities between market participants and
the Clearing Corporation of India Ltd. (CCIL) was facilitated to further develop the
collateralized borrowing and lending obligation (CBLO) segment.

34
5 GOVERNANCE ISSUES

Finally, Governance issues in banks as also in capital markets have come to occupy centre-
stage in recent times. The quality of corporate governance becomes critical as competition
intensifies, ownership is diversified and banks strive to retain their client base. The Reserve
Bank has, on its part, made significant efforts to improve governance practices in banks,
drawing upon international best practices. Thus, the recommendations of the Consultative
Group under the Chairmanship of Dr. A.S. Ganguly were forwarded to banks
for implementation. It is heartening to note that corporate governance presently finds explicit
mention in the annual reports of several banks. Having said that, it is important to recognize
that there is nothing like „optimal‟ level of corporate governance. As banking business
becomes more and more complex, banks should continuously strive to improve
shareholder value through better governance practices
Corporate Debt Market The development of a deep and liquid corporate bond market is
necessary for funding projects with long gestation lags and also for lending support to the
process of asset securitisation. Typically, the corporate bond markets remain underdeveloped
in most emerging economies. Despite long tradition, the corporate debt market in India is still
in a nascent stage of development. The primary corporate debt market is largely of
the private placement type and is concentrated among a few institutions both in terms
of issuance and subscription. On the other hand, the secondary market for corporate debt is
virtually absent in India. The stage for the development of a vibrant corporate debt market
with a large issuer profile and investor base is now set with the successful development of the
Government securities and money markets. With the development of an active primary and
secondary market in Government securities, a sovereign yield curve has emerged
even for sufficiently longer-term securities. An efficient clearing and settlement system and
credit rating system also exist. Some steps are still required to improve standards of public
disclosure, implement bankruptcy laws and enhance supportingin frastructure. There is also
need to broaden the institutional investor base, standardise products and reduce transaction
costs.
Long-term Financing /Infrastructure Financing Perhaps the biggest challenge in Indian
financial sector at this juncture is to find resources for funding investments in long gestation
projects including infrastructure. As in most other emerging market economies, corporate
sector in India is often credit constrained. The shortage is particularly marked with respect
to longer-term finance with the constraint being particularly severe for the small

35
and medium-size firms. Traditionally, the development financial institutions (DFIs) were the
major source of long-term finance in India. During the 1990s, the operative environment for
the DFIs underwent a drastic change, which substantially altered their business profile. The
balance sheets of DFIs became smaller with a continuous decline in their lending activities
over the last few years. The DFIs found it difficult to raise funds at market rates and lend
them in a profitable manner. The DFIs, therefore, were forced to follow the path
of transformation. In regard to infrastructure financing, a multi-agency approach for meeting
the needs of the economy is crucial. Pension Reform While sound institutional arrangements
for tapping funds need to be developed; there is also a need to ensure adequate supply of
these funds. The development of the pension and insurance sector is an important area where
reforms need to be implemented with vigour. Intensification of reforms in the areas of
insurance and pension are essential not only from the angle of social security, but also for
raising resources for long-term financing especially for infrastructure projects. The integral
part of the process of evolution of the financial sector is the tapping of new savings to meet
the surge in investment demand. Contractual savings that can be placed with the pension
funds/insurance companies are the most natural source of funds that can be deployed
productively in medium and long-term investments. At present, a large part of contractual
savings is invested in the Government [Link] by the rich experiences of other
countries, there is a need for widening the investment avenues for pension funds
and insurance companies after putting in place adequate prudential measures including a
robust risk management framework. By doing this, it would be possible to exploit the
emerging opportunities in both industrial and infrastructure financing. Venture Capita lFor
financing start-up firms, the role of venture capital can hardly be over-emphasised. The
venture capital financing is especially important as they can focus on sunrise industries and
also provide guidance to the start-up firms in the initial stages of their development. They
play a very useful role in solving the problem of pre-IPO financing. The venture financing
has not picked up that satisfactorily in India possibly because of stringent regulations.
Several issues relating to lock-in of shares, exit options, freedom to invest in various types
of instruments, modes of investment and some tax-related issues need to be addressed to
encourage flow of venture capital funds in India. In sum, the Indian financial sector has taken
several steps in the right direction, but much more needs to be done to ascend to commanding
heights. A cautious approach towards increasing efficiency within the framework of overall
financial stability can significantly contribute towards India becoming a leading financial
force in the world.

36
 CHAPTER 2 :- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

2.1 INTRODUCTION:

Research methodology is the structured framework that guides the systematic investigation of
a subject. In the context of this study, which explores the Indian financial system, its
challenges, and opportunities, the methodology serves as the foundation for obtaining
accurate, reliable, and insightful data. A well-defined research methodology ensures that the
analysis is objective, data-driven, and capable of providing meaningful conclusions.

The Indian financial system is a complex network comprising banking institutions, non-
banking financial companies (NBFCs), insurance firms, capital markets, fintech enterprises,
and regulatory bodies like the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Securities and Exchange
Board of India (SEBI), and the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India
(IRDAI). Given the multifaceted nature of this system, an effective research methodology is
crucial for understanding the interplay of these entities, identifying key challenges, and
evaluating potential growth opportunities.

This study employs a mixed-methods approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative
research techniques. This ensures a holistic understanding of the financial system by
integrating statistical analysis with expert opinions, industry reports, and policy evaluations.

Significance of Research Methodology in this Study

A robust research methodology is essential for:

1. Ensuring Accuracy: Financial systems involve vast and intricate data. A well-structured
methodology ensures that the data collected is accurate, relevant, and credible.

2. Objectivity in Analysis: The study must remain unbiased and independent, ensuring that
findings are based on factual evidence rather than subjective opinions.

3. Comparability: By using standard research techniques, findings can be compared with

global financial systems, highlighting India’s relative strengths and weaknesses.

4. Addressing Key Challenges: India’s financial system faces high Non-Performing Assets
(NPAs), digital transformation risks, regulatory complexities, and financial exclusion. A
structured methodology ensures these issues are examined in depth.

37
5. Identifying Growth Opportunities: The research must not only highlight problems but also
explore opportunities in fintech, digital banking, capital market expansion, and regulatory
reforms.

Approach to Research Methodology

This study follows a structured research methodology consisting of the following key
elements:

1. Defining Research Objectives: Establishing clear goals for understanding the structure,
performance, challenges, and future prospects of the Indian financial system.

2. Selecting the Research Design: Choosing a descriptive and analytical approach that
includes both qualitative and quantitative methods.

3. Data Collection Methods:

Primary Data: Surveys, interviews with financial experts, policymakers, banking officials,
and fintech entrepreneurs.

Secondary Data: Government reports, RBI and SEBI publications, financial journals, stock
market performance reports, and research papers.

4. Sampling Methodology: Using stratified random sampling to ensure representation across

various financial institutions and regions.

5. Data Analysis Techniques: Statistical tools such as regression analysis, risk assessment
models, and thematic policy evaluations are used for quantitative analysis, while qualitative
insights are derived from expert interviews and case studies.

6. Limitations and Constraints: Identifying data availability issues, evolving regulatory

landscapes, and the complexity of measuring financial inclusion accurately.

By adopting this structured methodology, this study aims to present a comprehensive,

evidence-based analysis of the Indian financial system, offering valuable insights for
policymakers, industry professionals, and researchers.

38
 2.2 Significance of the Research Topic

1. Importance of Studying the Indian Financial System

The financial system of a country is the backbone of its economy, facilitating capital
mobilization, credit allocation, investment flows, and financial stability. In the case of India,
the financial system has undergone significant transformations over the decades, evolving
from a state-controlled banking structure to a more liberalized and technology-driven
financial landscape. However, despite these advancements, challenges such as non-
performing assets (NPAs), financial exclusion, regulatory complexities, and digital security
risks continue to persist.

This research is significant because it provides an in-depth examination of India’s financial

system, identifying key challenges and uncovering opportunities that could enhance its
efficiency, inclusivity, and global competitiveness. Given India’s position as one of the
fastest-growing economies in the world, understanding its financial system’s strengths and
weaknesses is crucial for policymakers, financial institutions, investors, and the general
public.

2. Relevance to Economic Growth and Development

A well-functioning financial system plays a crucial role in economic development by:

Promoting Investment and Capital Formation: Banks, NBFCs, and capital markets channel
savings into productive investments, fueling industrial and infrastructural growth. Enhancing
Financial Inclusion: Government initiatives like Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY)
and digital payment systems (UPI, Aadhaar-linked banking) have increased financial access,
but gaps remain in rural and semi-urban areas. Ensuring Economic Stability: Effective
monetary policies by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) help control inflation, stabilize the
rupee, and manage interest rates, ensuring macroeconomic stability.

This study evaluates how well these functions are being performed and suggests measures to
improve the efficiency and accessibility of financial services in India.

3. Addressing Key Challenges in the Financial System

The Indian financial system faces several pressing challenges, including:

39
a) Rising Non-Performing Assets (NPAs):

Public sector banks (PSBs) have been struggling with high levels of NPAs, impacting their
lending [Link] the causes and suggesting solutions for NPA management is
essential for financial stability.

b) Financial Exclusion in Rural and Underserved Areas:

A large portion of the rural population still relies on informal credit sources, leading to
exploitation by moneylenders. Despite digital banking initiatives, many small businesses and
farmers lack access to affordable credit.

c) Regulatory Challenges and Policy Framework:

India has multiple financial regulatory bodies, including RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, and PFRDA,
leading to overlapping regulations and compliance issues. Understanding the effectiveness of
the current regulatory framework and suggesting reforms is essential for improving
efficiency.

d) Impact of Fintech and Digital Transformation:

The rise of fintech startups has revolutionized banking, lending, and payments, but it also
brings concerns about cybersecurity, data privacy, and regulatory [Link] study
examines the balance between innovation and regulation to ensure digital financial security.

4. Exploring Growth Opportunities in the Financial Sector

Despite these challenges, the Indian financial system has immense opportunities for growth,
including:

a) Expansion of Digital Payments and Fintech:

India’s Unified Payments Interface (UPI) is one of the most successful digital
payment platforms globally. Fintech adoption in lending, wealth management, and
insurance is expected to drive financial penetration further.
b) Strengthening the Capital Markets: With increasing retail participation in stock
markets and growing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and Foreign Institutional
Investment (FII), India’s capital markets present significant growth potential.

40
 Enhancing investor confidence through better governance and transparency is a key
area of research.
c) Sustainable and Green Financing: The financial sector can play a role in climate
financing, supporting sustainable infrastructure and green [Link] ways to
integrate sustainability into financial decision-making is critical for long-term growth.

5. Policy Implications and Contribution to Financial Reforms

A well-researched analysis of India’s financial system can help shape effective policies and
regulatory reforms. This study aims to: Provide evidence-based recommendations for
banking sector reforms. Suggest ways to improve financial inclusion policies. Examine the
impact of government initiatives like GST, demonetization, and Digital India on the financial
[Link] India’s financial sector’s preparedness for global economic shifts and crises.
By addressing these aspects, the study contributes to strengthening the financial system,
ensuring stability, and enhancing India’s position in the global economy.

2.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

1. Understanding the Challenges in India’s Financial System

The Indian financial system has undergone significant transformations over the years,
evolving from a state-controlled banking structure to a more liberalized, technology-driven,
and market-oriented financial ecosystem. Despite these advancements, several fundamental
challenges persist, affecting its efficiency, inclusivity, and stability.

One of the major concerns is the rising levels of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) in the
banking sector, particularly among public sector banks (PSBs). High NPAs reduce the ability
of banks to lend, impacting credit availability for businesses and individuals. Despite the
government's initiatives such as bank recapitalization, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
(IBC), and asset reconstruction companies (ARCs), the problem continues to strain the
financial sector.

Another critical issue is financial exclusion—a significant portion of India's rural population
still lacks access to formal banking services. While initiatives like Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan
Yojana (PMJDY) and digital banking platforms have improved access, low financial literacy,
inadequate banking infrastructure, and reluctance to adopt digital transactions remain
barriers.

41
2. Regulatory and Structural Issues

The Indian financial system operates under a multi-regulator framework involving the
Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the
Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), and the Pension Fund
Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA). While these bodies play a crucial role in
maintaining financial stability, overlapping regulations and compliance complexities often
create inefficiencies.

Furthermore, the informal credit market remains dominant in rural areas, where small
businesses and farmers rely on moneylenders due to the cumbersome processes and collateral
requirements of formal banks. Microfinance institutions (MFIs) and cooperative banks aim to
bridge this gap, but their reach and impact are still limited.

3. Digital Transformation and Associated Risks

The rise of fintech, digital banking, and UPI-based transactions has revolutionized India’s
financial landscape. However, cybersecurity threats, digital frauds, and data privacy concerns
pose serious risks to consumers and financial institutions. Ensuring a secure, inclusive, and
well-regulated digital financial environment remains a significant challenge.

4. Research Focus

This study aims to analyze these problems in depth, exploring their root causes and
evaluating potential solutions. The research will focus on:

 Assessing the impact of NPAs on banking efficiency and credit flow.

 Examining financial inclusion gaps and strategies to improve access to banking
services.
 Evaluating regulatory challenges and suggesting reforms for better coordination
among financial regulators.
 Identifying risks associated with digital finance and cybersecurity, proposing
strategies for secure digital transactions.

42
 2.4 SCOPE OF STUDY
1. Introduction to the Scope of the Study
The Indian financial system is a vast and complex network comprising banks, non-banking
financial companies (NBFCs), insurance firms, capital markets, fintech enterprises, and
regulatory bodies. It plays a pivotal role in the economic development of the country by
facilitating savings, investments, and credit distribution. Given its dynamic nature and
evolving challenges, this study aims to explore its various dimensions, focusing on structural
composition, regulatory challenges, financial inclusion, technological advancements, and
emerging opportunities.
The study will analyze the efficiency, accessibility, and resilience of the financial system,
highlighting key areas that require reform and innovation. This research is particularly
relevant in the current scenario, where India's financial sector is experiencing rapid digital
transformation, increasing regulatory interventions, and shifting global economic trends.
2. Key Areas Covered in the Study
a) Banking Sector Analysis
 Assessment of public sector banks (PSBs), private sector banks, regional rural banks
(RRBs), and cooperative banks in terms of financial performance, credit flow, and
risk management.

 Examination of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) and their impact on banking stability.

 Evaluation of government interventions, banking reforms, and financial restructuring

policies such as the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and bank recapitalization
efforts.
b) Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Microfinance Institutions (MFIs)
 Study of NBFCs' role in providing credit to small businesses, rural populations, and
unbanked sectors.

 Analysis of microfinance institutions (MFIs) and self-help groups (SHGs) in financial

inclusion efforts.

 Examination of the regulatory framework governing NBFCs, MFIs, and cooperative

credit institutions.

43
c) Capital Markets and Investment Trends
 Evaluation of the role of stock exchanges, bond markets, mutual funds, and foreign
direct investments (FDI).

 Impact of foreign institutional investments (FII) and government policies on capital

market growth.

 Assessment of investor confidence and corporate governance in financial markets.

d) Financial Inclusion and Accessibility
 Examination of initiatives like Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY), Direct
Benefit Transfer (DBT), and digital payment platforms (UPI, Aadhaar-linked
banking).

 Analysis of barriers to financial inclusion, such as low financial literacy, limited

banking infrastructure in rural areas, and lack of trust in formal financial institutions.

 Suggestions for expanding financial services to underprivileged and marginalized

communities.
e) Digital Transformation and Fintech Innovation
 Study of the role of fintech companies in reshaping banking, lending, and payments.

 Impact of blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI), and big data analytics on financial
services.

 Analysis of cybersecurity challenges, digital frauds, and risks in the financial

technology sector.
f) Regulatory and Policy Framework
 Examination of financial regulations enforced by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI),
Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Insurance Regulatory and
Development Authority of India (IRDAI), and Pension Fund Regulatory and
Development Authority (PFRDA).

 Identification of regulatory challenges, policy overlaps, and inefficiencies in financial

governance.

44
  Evaluation of recent financial reforms and their effectiveness in ensuring financial
stability and transparency.

3. Geographic and Sectoral Scope

This study will cover:

 Urban, semi-urban, and rural financial landscapes to understand regional disparities in

financial access and services.

 The role of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), start-ups, large corporations, and
government institutions in the financial ecosystem.

 A comparative study of India's financial system with global financial models to

identify best practices and improvement areas.

4. Limitations of the Study

While the study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis, it may face certain limitations:

 Data availability constraints, especially in the informal financial sector.

 Rapidly changing financial policies may alter the relevance of findings over time.

 Regional financial disparities may require localized studies beyond the scope of this
research.

45
 2.5 OBJEVTIVES OF STUDY

The primary objective of this study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the Indian
financial system, its challenges, and opportunities. The study aims to explore the structural,
regulatory, and technological aspects of the financial ecosystem, providing insights that can
aid in policy formulation and financial sector development.

Specific Objectives:

1. To analyze the structure and components of the Indian financial system – Examining the
roles of banks, NBFCs, capital markets, insurance, fintech, and regulatory institutions.

2. To assess the challenges faced by the Indian financial sector – Evaluating key issues such
as non-performing assets (NPAs), financial exclusion, regulatory complexities, and digital
security risks.

3. To study financial inclusion initiatives and their impact – Analyzing government schemes
like Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY), Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT), and digital
payment systems (UPI, Aadhaar-linked banking).

4. To examine the role of fintech and digital transformation – Understanding how financial
technology, AI, blockchain, and mobile banking are reshaping India's financial services.

5. To evaluate regulatory and policy frameworks – Analyzing the effectiveness of financial

regulations enforced by RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, and PFRDA, and identifying areas for
improvement.

6. To explore capital market development and investment trends – Assessing the role of stock
exchanges, mutual funds, foreign institutional investments (FII), and bond markets in
economic growth.

46
7. To identify opportunities for future growth and financial innovation – Exploring
sustainable finance, green investments, digital lending, and AI-driven financial services to
enhance India’s global financial standing.

By achieving these objectives, the study aims to provide valuable recommendations to

strengthen India’s financial system, promote financial inclusion, and support long-term
economic development.

2.6 UNIVERSE AND SAMPLE

1. Universe of the Study
The universe of this study comprises all entities and stakeholders involved in the Indian
financial system, including:

I. Banking Institutions – Public sector banks (PSBs), private sector banks, regional rural
banks (RRBs), cooperative banks, and foreign banks operating in India.

II. Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) – Housing finance companies,

microfinance institutions (MFIs), and asset management firms.

III. Capital Markets and Investment Firms – Stock exchanges, mutual funds, foreign
institutional investors (FIIs), and insurance companies.

IV. Regulatory Bodies – Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Securities and Exchange Board of
India (SEBI), Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI),
and Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA).

V. Fintech Companies and Digital Banking Services – Payment service providers, digital
lending platforms, and blockchain-based financial services.

VI. End Users – Retail customers, corporate clients, small and medium enterprises
(SMEs), and rural entrepreneurs utilizing financial services.

47
This broad universe allows for a comprehensive analysis of the financial system, ensuring
diverse perspectives and insights.

2. Sample Selection

To make the study more manageable and relevant, a representative sample will be selected
from the universe. The sample will include:

a) Institutional Sample:

 10 leading banks (mix of public, private, and rural banks) to analyze credit flow and
NPA management.

 5 major NBFCs to study their role in lending and financial inclusion.

 5 fintech firms to understand digital transformation and innovation in the financial

sector.

 Capital market participants (mutual fund houses, stockbrokers, institutional investors)

to examine investment trends.

b) Respondent Sample:

 Banking professionals, financial analysts, policymakers, and fintech experts (through

interviews and surveys).

 100 retail customers (urban and rural) to assess financial inclusion, digital adoption,
and service accessibility.

 Small business owners and MSME representatives to understand credit access and
challenges in financial services.

48
The sample is selected using stratified random sampling and purposive sampling to ensure
representation across various financial sectors and demographics.

This approach ensures that the study captures diverse insights, industry trends, and consumer
experiences, leading to meaningful conclusions and policy recommendations.

2.7 JUSTIFICATION OF SAMPLING METHOD

Selecting an appropriate sampling method is crucial for ensuring that the study accurately
represents the Indian financial system while remaining practical and feasible. Given the vast
scope of the financial sector, a combination of stratified random sampling and purposive
sampling has been chosen for this research.

1. Use of Stratified Random Sampling

Stratified random sampling ensures that different segments of the financial system are
proportionally represented in the study. The financial sector is diverse, consisting of banks,
NBFCs, fintech firms, regulatory bodies, and capital market participants. To ensure
comprehensive coverage: The universe is divided into strata based on financial institutions
(e.g., banks, NBFCs, fintech). Random samples are selected from each stratum to eliminate
bias and improve representativeness. This method allows for a balanced comparison between
different types of financial institutions.

Advantages of Stratified Sampling:

✔Ensures that all key segments of the financial system are included.

✔Reduces sampling error and increases the reliability of findings.

✔Facilitates meaningful comparisons between different financial entities.

49
2. Use of Purposive Sampling

Purposive sampling is used for selecting key informants, experts, and policymakers who have
in-depth knowledge of financial systems. This method is appropriate because:

 Financial experts, banking officials, fintech leaders, and policymakers provide critical
insights that cannot be captured through random sampling.

 Selection is based on relevance and expertise rather than chance, ensuring that the
study benefits from informed opinions.

 This approach allows the study to focus on specialized knowledge, policy

implications, and emerging trends in the financial sector.

Advantages of Purposive Sampling:

✔Helps gather qualitative insights from industry experts.

✔Ensures that specialized knowledge is incorporated into the study.

✔ Supports a deeper understanding of financial regulations, policy frameworks, and

technological advancements.

3. Justification for Sample Size and Composition

The study includes a mix of banks, NBFCs, fintech firms, regulators, and consumers to
provide a holistic perspective.

The sample size is chosen to balance statistical reliability with feasibility.

A combination of quantitative data (banking statistics, financial reports) and qualitative

insights (expert interviews, consumer surveys) ensures comprehensive analysis.

50
 2.8 SAMPLE SELECTION
1. Criteria for Sample Selection
The selection of the sample for this study is based on the diverse composition of the Indian
financial system and the need to analyze various stakeholders, including financial institutions,
regulatory bodies, and consumers. To ensure a comprehensive and balanced study, the
sample includes representatives from banking, NBFCs, fintech, capital markets, and financial
service users.
The following criteria have been considered while selecting the sample:

1. Institutional Representation – Inclusion of major financial institutions such as banks,

NBFCs, fintech firms, and investment firms to examine their operational efficiency and
challenges.
2. Regulatory Representation – Experts from RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, and PFRDA to provide
insights into financial policies and regulations.

3. Consumer Representation – A mix of urban and rural financial service users, small
business owners, and MSME representatives to understand financial accessibility and
challenges.

2. Sample Composition

The sample is divided into two broad categories:

A) Institutional Sample (Stratified Random Sampling)
A structured selection of financial institutions to ensure equal representation across sectors.
B) Respondent Sample (Purposive Sampling)
A targeted selection of individuals based on expertise and relevance to the financial system.

3. Justification for Sample Selection

 Ensures diverse representation from all major financial institutions.
 Includes expert opinions to support policy recommendations.
 Captures real-world consumer experiences to assess financial accessibility.

51
  Combines quantitative (institutional data) and qualitative (respondent feedback)
insights for a well-rounded analysis.

2.9 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

1. Introduction to the Research Hypothesis
A research hypothesis is a statement or assumption that provides a direction for investigation.
It helps in systematically examining relationships between variables within the Indian
financial system. Given the complexity and evolving nature of India’s financial sector, this
study formulates hypotheses focusing on financial stability, inclusion, digital transformation,
and regulatory efficiency.

The hypotheses in this study are divided into two categories:

1. Null Hypothesis (H₀) – Assumes no significant relationship between the variables being
studied.

2. Alternative Hypothesis (H₁) – Assumes a significant relationship between the variables,

challenging the null hypothesis.

2. Hypothesis Framework

A) Financial Stability and Non-Performing Assets (NPAs)

H₀: There is no significant impact of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) on the profitability and
lending capacity of Indian banks.

H₁: High levels of NPAs negatively affect the profitability and lending capacity of Indian
banks, leading to financial instability.

B) Financial Inclusion and Banking Access

52
H₀: Financial inclusion initiatives have not significantly improved banking access in rural
and underprivileged areas.

H₁: Government schemes like Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) and digital
banking have significantly enhanced financial inclusion in rural and underprivileged areas.

C) Digital Transformation and Customer Adoption

H₀: Digital banking services and fintech innovations have not significantly changed
consumer behavior in India’s financial sector.

H₁: The adoption of digital banking and fintech services has significantly increased, leading
to a transformation in consumer financial behavior.
D) Regulatory Framework and Market Stability

H₀: The current financial regulatory framework does not have a significant impact on the
stability and transparency of the Indian financial system.

H₁: A well-regulated financial system significantly contributes to financial stability,

transparency, and investor confidence.

E) Capital Market Development and Economic Growth

H₀: Capital market growth has no significant relationship with India's economic
development.

H₁: A well-developed capital market contributes significantly to India's economic growth by

attracting investments and improving liquidity.

3. Testing the Hypothesis

To validate these hypotheses, the study will employ:

53
✔Quantitative Analysis – Using financial reports, banking data, NPA trends, and investment

statistics.

✔ Qualitative Analysis – Conducting surveys and expert interviews to assess financial

inclusion and digital adoption.

✔Regression Models & Statistical Tools – To measure relationships between variables such

as NPAs and profitability, digital adoption, and customer satisfaction.

2.10 RESEARCH MODEL

1. Introduction to the Research Model
A research model serves as a framework that defines the relationship between key variables
in the study. For a comprehensive analysis of the Indian financial system, its challenges, and
opportunities, the research model integrates qualitative and quantitative approaches to
examine financial stability, inclusion, digital transformation, and regulatory effectiveness.

2. Conceptual Framework
The research model is structured into three key components:

A) Independent Variables (Factors influencing the financial system)

 Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) – Assessing their impact on banking stability.
 Financial Inclusion Initiatives – Studying accessibility to banking services in rural and
urban areas.
 Digital Transformation – Evaluating the role of fintech, mobile banking, and digital
payments.
 Regulatory Policies – Examining RBI, SEBI, and government policies in shaping
financial stability.
 Capital Market Growth – Understanding how investments and stock markets
influence economic development.

B) Dependent Variables (Outcomes affected by independent variables)

 Banking Sector Performance – Profitability, lending capacity, and risk management.
 Consumer Financial Behavior – Adoption of digital services and formal banking.

54
  Economic Growth – The role of financial markets in GDP growth and investment
flow.
 Market Stability – The effectiveness of regulations in preventing financial crises.

C) Moderating and Mediating Variables (Factors influencing relationships)

 Government interventions – Influence of policies like bank recapitalization and
financial stimulus.
 Technological advancements – AI, blockchain, and cybersecurity in financial
services.
 Global economic trends – External factors such as inflation, interest rates, and foreign
investments.

3. Research Model Design

a) Quantitative Approach
 Data Collection: Banking reports, NPA trends, stock market indices, and fintech
adoption rates.
 Statistical Methods: Regression analysis, correlation models, and hypothesis testing to
measure relationships.
b) Qualitative Approach
 Expert Interviews: Policymakers, banking officials, and fintech leaders.
 Consumer Surveys: Assessing public perception of digital banking and financial
accessibility.

55
 2.11 DATA COLLECTION
1. Introduction to Data Collection
Data collection is a crucial step in research as it provides the necessary information to
analyze the Indian financial system, its challenges, and opportunities. This study adopts a
mixed-method approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative data to ensure a
comprehensive and balanced analysis.
The data collection process focuses on gathering reliable, relevant, and updated financial
information from multiple sources, including financial institutions, regulatory bodies,
consumers, and industry experts.

2. Types of Data Collected

This study utilizes two types of data:

A) Primary Data (First-hand data collected for this research)

Primary data is collected directly from respondents through:

1. Surveys and Questionnaires: Conducted among bank customers, small business owners,
and MSME representatives to assess financial accessibility and digital adoption. Includes
both closed-ended and open-ended questions to gain quantitative insights and qualitative
perspectives.

2. Interviews with Financial Experts: Conducted with banking professionals, policymakers,

and fintech leaders to understand industry challenges and regulatory concerns. Provides
insights into financial reforms, digital finance, and economic policies.

3. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): Organized with different financial stakeholders to

debate financial system efficiency, risks, and growth potential. Helps in understanding
regional disparities in financial access and service quality.

4. Observational Data: Monitoring trends in digital transactions, bank branch usage, and
fintech adoption through real-time case studies.

56
B) Secondary Data (Existing data from reliable sources)

Secondary data is obtained from:

1. Government and Regulatory Reports: Reserve Bank of India (RBI) reports on banking
performance, NPAs, and financial stability. SEBI, IRDAI, and PFRDA publications on
capital markets, insurance, and pension fund management. Ministry of Finance data on
financial inclusion and economic growth.

2. Banking and Financial Institution Reports: Annual reports of public and private sector
banks, NBFCs, and fintech firms. Research papers from financial think tanks (NABARD,
NITI Aayog, etc.)

3. Stock Market and Investment Data: BSE and NSE reports on stock market trends and
investment patterns. Foreign Institutional Investor (FII) inflows and mutual fund reports.

4. Industry Research and Publications: Reports from financial consulting firms (PwC,
Deloitte, McKinsey, etc.). Research papers from academic institutions and journals.

5. Media and Online Resources: Articles from The Economic Times, Business Standard, and
financial news websites. White papers and case studies on fintech growth and digital banking
innovations.

57
3. Data Collection Techniques

METHOD PURPOSE TOOLS USED

SURVEYS To assess consumer Google forms, filed
behaviour and financial interviews
inclusion
Expert interviews To gain insights on financial Structured questions,
policies and banking reforms recorded conversations
Focus group discussions To explore financial sector Group meetings, discussion
trends and challenges panels
Statistical Reports To analyze banking RBI Reports, SEBI data
performance and investment
trends
Online Resources To track Emerging fintech News Portals, Financial
and digital finance Websites
developments

4. Justification for Data Collection Approach

 Combining primary and secondary data ensures a holistic and well-rounded study.
 Primary data helps in understanding real-world challenges, consumer behavior, and
expert insights.
 Secondary data provides historical trends, policy changes, and economic performance
indicators.

This approach enhances the reliability and credibility of the research findings.

58
 2.12 DATA ANALYSIS
1. Introduction to Data Analysis
Data analysis is a crucial step in this research as it helps in interpreting collected data,
identifying patterns, and validating hypotheses related to the Indian financial system. By
using quantitative and qualitative analysis methods, the study aims to derive meaningful
insights into financial stability, inclusion, digital transformation, and regulatory effectiveness.

The analysis involves examining financial trends, comparing banking performance,

understanding consumer behavior, and evaluating policy impacts using statistical tools and
qualitative assessments.

2. Data Analysis Methods

A) Quantitative Data Analysis

This approach is used for numerical and statistical data collected from financial reports,
surveys, and regulatory bodies. The methods include:

1. Descriptive Statistics: Used to analyze banking performance metrics, NPA ratios, and
investment trends. Key indicators: mean, median, standard deviation, and growth rates.
Helps in understanding overall financial sector trends and variations.

2. Comparative Analysis : Comparing public sector vs. private sector banks, fintech vs.
traditional banking, and rural vs. urban financial accessibility. Identifies key differences in
efficiency, profitability, and adoption of digital financial services.

3. Regression and Correlation Analysis: Examines relationships between NPA levels and
bank profitability, financial inclusion and economic growth, digital finance adoption and
customer satisfaction. Helps in testing research hypotheses and measuring the impact of
independent variables on dependent variables.

59
4. Trend Analysis: Used to track stock market movements, fintech adoption rates, and
financial inclusion growth over time. Helps in forecasting future trends in the Indian financial
system.

B) Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative analysis is used for non-numerical insights collected from interviews, focus group
discussions, and expert opinions. The methods include:
1. Thematic Analysis: Identifies common themes from expert interviews, consumer surveys,
and policy discussions. Key themes: regulatory challenges, digital transformation, financial
literacy, and consumer trust.

2. Content Analysis: Analyzing government policies, financial regulations, and media reports
to understand the effectiveness of financial reforms. Helps in interpreting policy implications
and industry expert perspectives.

3. Case Study Analysis: Examining specific case studies on successful fintech startups,
financial crises, or banking fraud incidents. Provides real-world insights into financial sector
challenges and innovations.

3. Data Interpretation and Findings

After applying the above methods, the results are interpreted to:

✔ Identify key financial sector challenges (e.g., NPAs, financial exclusion, cybersecurity

risks).

✔Assess the impact of government policies and financial regulations on economic growth.

✔Evaluate customer perceptions and adoption of digital banking and fintech services.

✔Compare the performance of traditional vs. digital financial services.

✔Provide recommendations to enhance financial stability, inclusion, and innovation.

60
4. Tools and Software Used
Analysis Type Tools Used
Statistical Analysis SPSS, Microsoft Excel
Regression & Correlation R, Python, STATA
Survey Analysis Google Forms, Qualtrics
Qualitative analysis NVivo, MAXQDA

2.13 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

1. Introduction
Every research study has certain limitations that may affect the scope, accuracy, and
generalizability of its findings. This study on the Indian financial system, its challenges, and
opportunities also encounters some constraints due to data availability, regulatory changes,
market fluctuations, and respondent biases.

2. Key Limitations

A) Data Availability and Reliability

 Some financial institutions do not publicly disclose complete financial data, leading to
gaps in analysis.
 Data on shadow banking and informal financial sectors is difficult to access, affecting
the study’s comprehensiveness.
 Differences in reporting standards between banks, NBFCs, and fintech firms may
cause inconsistencies.

B) Regulatory and Policy Changes

 The Indian financial system is highly dynamic, with frequent changes in RBI policies,
SEBI regulations, and government reforms.
 Policy shifts during the study period may impact financial trends, making some
findings subject to revision.

61
C) Market Volatility
 Stock market trends and economic conditions fluctuate due to global financial factors,
inflation, and geopolitical risks.
 The impact of economic downturns or unexpected crises (e.g., COVID-19, financial
recessions) may not be fully predictable.

D) Sampling and Respondent Bias

 Despite using stratified random and purposive sampling methods, there may be
underrepresentation of certain financial institutions or consumer segments.
 Respondents in surveys and interviews may provide biased opinions based on
personal experiences or institutional affiliations.

E) Time Constraints
 The study is conducted over a limited timeframe, making it difficult to track long-
term financial trends and policy effects.
 A more extended period of research could yield more accurate and stable insights.

62
 CHAPTER – 3 The Institutional Environment in IndiaAn
Assessment
3.1 Law, Institutions and Business Environment
The most striking fact about India’s legal system is the difference between investors
protection provided by the law as opposed to protection in practice. Compares India’s scores
relative to different legal-origin country groups examined in the markets along several
dimensions of law and institutions. As discussed above, with the English common-law
system, India has strong protection of investors on paper. For example, the Company’s Act of
1956, to 2/4 in DMS (2005), based on the Sick Industrial Companies Act of 1985)
and shareholder rights (5/6) are the highest of any country in the world. Corruption is a
major systemic problem in many developing countries and is of Development Report2005)
have found that corruption was the number one constraint for firms in South Asia and that
the two most corrupt public institutions identified by the respond ensign India (as Based on
Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, India has a score of 2.9 out of 10 in
2005 (a higher score means less corruption),which ranked 88 out of 140 countries has not
Next, we have two measures for the quality of accounting systems. The
disclosure requirements index (from 0 to 1, higher score means more disclosure; LLS 2006)
measures the extent to which listed firms have to disclose their ownership structure, business
operations and corporate governance mechanisms to legal authorities and the public. India’s
score of 0.92 is higher than the averages of all LLSV subgroups firms must disclose a large
amount of information. However, this does not imply the quality of (higher score means more
earnings management; Leuz, Nanda, and Wysocki 2003),
India’s score is 13 much higher than the average of English origin countries, and is only lower
than the German origin countries, suggesting that investors have a difficult time in evaluating
Indian companies based on publicly available reports. It seems that while Indian companies
produce copious amounts of data, form triumphs over substance in disclosure and with an
accounting system that allows considerable flexibility, there is enough room for companies
to hide or disguise the truth. The efficiency and effectiveness of the legal system is
of primary importance for contract enforcement, and we have two measures. First, according
to the legal formalism (DLLS 2003) index, India has a higher formalism index than the
average of English origin countries, and is only lower than that of the French origin countries.

63
The legality index, a composite measure of the effectiveness of a country’s legal institutions,
is based on the weighted average of five categories of the quality of legal institutions
and government in the country (see Berkowitz,Pistor, and Richard 2003). Consistent with
other measures, India’s score is lower than the averages of all the subgroups of LLSV
countries, suggesting that India’s legal institutions are less effective than those of many new
legal rules and regulations than other countries. Finally, as for the business environment in
India, a recent World Bank survey found that, among the top ten obstacles to
Indian businesses, the three which the firms surveyed considered to be a “major” or “very
severe” obstacle and exceeding the world average are corruption (the most important
problem), availability of electricity, and labour regulations. Threat of nationalization or direct
government intervention in business is new economy in India is significant. It is estimated to
be about 23% of GDP.7 Creditor and investor rights were against will ful defaulters. Large
corporate houses often got away with default, or got poor projects financed through the state-
owned banking sector, often by using connections with influential politicians and
bureaucrats. 7 This figure is 22.4% according to Schneider and Enste (2000), and 23.1%
by Schneider (2002) (World Bank).Popular perception, however, would put it significantly
larger, particularly given that the average figure of OECD countries themselves is about 12%.
14 Since the beginning of liberalization in 1991, two major improvements have taken place in
the area of creditor rights protection
–
the establishment of the quasi-legal Debt Recovery Tribunals that have reduced delinquency
and consequently lending rates (Visaria (2005)); and the passing of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act in 2002 and the
subsequent Enforcement These laws have paved the way for the establishment of Asset
Reconstruction Companies and allow banks and financial institutions to act decisively against
defaulting borrowers. In recent years, recovery has shown significant improvement,
presumably because, at least in part, of a well-performing economy. To summarize, despite
strong protection provided by the law, legal protection is considerably weakened in practice
due to an inefficient judicial system, characterized by overburdened courts, slow judicial
process, and widespread corruption within the legal system and government. While the
need for judicial and legal reforms has long been recognized, little legislative action has
actually taken place so far (Debroy (2000)).Currently, the government is trying to emulate the
success of China by following the Special Economic Zone approach rather than overhauling
the entire legal system.

64
 3.2 Financial/Business Laws and Regulations in India

Red tape and regulations still rank among the leading deterrents for business andforeign
investment in India leading to its latest ranking of 116 out of 155 in the World Bank’s Ease of
Doing Business indicator in 2006 (World Bank, 2006). India features consistently in the
second half of the sample for all aspects of business regulation (and is out of the top 100 for
most aspects) except for investor protection. To start a business in India entrepreneurs have
close to twice the number of procedures to follow as in OECD countries, about three and a
half times the time delay and costs of dealing with licenses in India is roughly in
corresponding proportions with their respective OECD values. Very recently (second half
of August 2007), the Government of India has decided to improve this situation and has
announced a drastic reduction in the number of 15 approvals and permits necessary to start
new business. Whether and when this translates to actual practiceis yet to be seen. It is almost
twice as hard to hire people in India as in OECD countries and almost three times as hard and
costly to fire them. With have considerable variation in their labor laws across states, Besley
and Burgess (2004) show that during the three and half decades before liberalization began in
1991, Indian states that followed more pro-worker policies experienced lower output,
investment, employment and productivity in the registered or “formal” sector and higher
urban poverty with an increase in informal sector output. In the area of credit availability,
India lags behind not because of creditors‟ rights (which is close to OECD standards)
but because of the paucity of credit quality information through the use of public registry or
coverage of private bureaus. However, India’s excellent investor protection provisions in the
law should be viewed together with her performance in contract enforcement where the
number of procedures and time delays are about double that in OECD countries and the costs
of contract enforcement over four times that in OECD countries. As for securities markets
regulation, using the framework of La Porta et al (2006)that focuses on disclosure
and liability requirements as well as the quality of public enforcement of the regulations
controlling securities markets, India scores 0.92 in the index of disclosure requirements third
highest after the United States and Singapore. As for liability standard, India’s score is the
fifth highest, 0.66 while the sample means is0.47. In terms of the quality of public
enforcement, i.e. the nature and powers of the supervisory authority, the Securities and

65
Exchanges Board of India (SEBI), India scores 0.67, higher than the overall sample mean as
well as the English-origin average of 0.52 and 0.62 respectively and ranks 14th in the sample.
In comparing the regulatory powers and performance of SEBI with those of the SEC
(Securities and Exchanges Commission) in the USA, Bose (2005) concludes that while the
scope of Indian securities laws are quite pervasive, there are significant manipulation and
insider trading. Between 1999 and 2004, Bose finds
that SEBI took action in 481 cases as opposed to 2,789 cases for the SEC even though the
latter regulates a significantly more mature market. As a ratio of actions taken to the number
of companies under their respective jurisdictions, SEBI‟s figure comes out to be an
unimpressive 0.09 while that of the SEC is 0.52. Also the ratio for action taken to
investigations made is quite [Link] for appeals before higher authorities – the Securities
Appellate Tribunal (SAT) or the Finance Ministry – in 30 to 50% of cases, the decision goes
against SEBI. Though SEBI has had some success prosecuting intermediaries, it has failed to
convince the SAT in its proceedings against corporate insiders and major market players.
Thus the quality of public enforcement of securities laws appears to be a problem in India.
The institution of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) in the early 90‟s and the passing of the
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest
(SARFAESI) Act in 2002 were aimed at remedying the slowness of the judicial process. The
SARFAESI Act paves the way for the establishment of Asset Reconstruction Companies
(ARCs) that can take the Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) off the balance sheets of banks and
recover them. Operations of these ARCs would be restricted to asset reconstruction and
securitization only. It also allows banks and financial institutions to directly seize assets of a
defaulting borrower who defaults fails to respond within 60 days of a notice. Borrowers can
appeal to DRTs only after the assets are seized and the Act allows the sale of seized assets.
The SARFAESI Act itself, however, does not provide a final solution to the recovery
problems. With the borrower’s right to approach the DRT, the DRAT (Debt Recovery
Appellate Tribunal) and, in some cases, even a High Court, a case can easily be dragged for
three to four years during which time the sale of the seized asset cannot take place. It is
perhaps too soon to evaluate its effects on reducing defaults but public sector banks have
had some success recovering their loans by seizing and selling assets since the Act came into
existence. The recovery rates of bad debts have registered a sharp rise in 2005-06, but it is
difficult to separate the contribution of the booming economy to this from that of the
improvement in corporate governance .Accounting Standards (AS) 18 by the Institute
of Chartered Accountants in India (ICAI) in 2001 which, among other things, makes reporting

66
of “related party transactions” by Indian companies mandatory. Related parties include
holding and subsidiary companies, key management personnel and their direct relatives,
“parties with control exist” which includes joint ventures and fellow subsidiaries; and other
parties like promoters and employee trusts. Transactions include purchase/sale of goods and
assets, borrowing, lending and leasing, hiring and agency arrangements, guarantee
agreements, transfer of research and development and management contracts. This step has
gone a long way in bringing transparency to the dealings of Indian
companies, particularly the group affiliates. The area of the Ease of Doing Business index
where India fares worst is undoubtedly that of closing a business. Consequently recovery
rates are very low too below 13% as opposed to about 74% in OECD countries. Kang and
Nayar (2004) point out that there is no single comprehensive and integrated policy on
corporate bankruptcy in India in the lines of Chapter 11 or Chapter 7 US bankruptcy
code. Overlapping jurisdictions of the High Courts, the Company Law Board, the Board for
Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) and the Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs)
contribute to the costs and delays of bankruptcy. The Companies (Second Amendment) Act,
2002seeks to address these problems by establishing a National Company Law Tribunaland
stipulating a time-bound rehabilitation or liquidation process to within less than two years as
well as bringing about other positive changes in the bankruptcy code.

3.3 Stock Exchanges in India

India currently has two major stock exchanges: the National Stock Exchange (NSE)
established in 1994 and the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), the oldest stock exchange in
Asia, established in 1875. Up to 1992, BSE was a monopoly, marked with inefficiencies,
high costs of intermediation, and manipulative practices, so that external market users often
found themselves disadvantaged. The economic reforms created four new institutions: the
Securities and Exchanges Board of India (SEBI), the National Stock Exchange (NSE), the
National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC), and the National Securities Depository
(NSDL). The National Stock Exchange (NSE), a limited liability company owned by public
sector financial institutions, now accounts for about two-thirds of the stock exchange trading
in India, and virtually all of its derivatives trading. The National Securities Clearing
Corporation (NSCC) is the legal counter-party to net obligations of each brokerage firm, and
thereby eliminates counter-party risk and possibility of payments crises. It follows a
rigorous „risk containment‟ framework involving collateral and intra-day monitoring. The

67
NSCC, duly assisted by the National Securities Depository (NSDL), has an excellent record
of reliable settlement schedules since its inception in the mid-nineties. The Securities and
Exchanges Board of India (SEBI) has introduced a rigorous regulatory regime to ensure
fairness, transparency and good practice. For example, for greater transparency, SEBI has
mandated mandatory disclosure for all transactions where total quantity of shares is more
than 0.5% of the equity of the company. Brokers disclose to the stock exchange, immediately
after trade execution, the name of the client in addition to trade details; and the
Stock exchange disseminates the information to the general public on the same day. The new
environment of transparency, fairness and efficient regulation led BSE, in1996, to also
become a transparent electronic limit order book market with an efficient trading system
similar to the NSE. Equity and equity derivatives trading in India have skyrocketed to record
levels over the course of the last ten years. In 2005, about 5000 companies were listed and
traded on NSE and/or BSE. While the dollar value of trading on the Indian stock exchanges is
much lower than the dollar value of trading in Europe or in the US, it is important to note that
the number of equity trades on BSE/NSE is ten times greater than that of Euro next
or London, and of the same order of magnitude as that of NASDAQ/NYSE. Similarly, the
number of derivatives trades on NSE is several times greater than that of Euro next/ London,
and of an order of magnitude comparable to US derivatives exchanges. The number of
trades is an important indicator of the extent of investor interest and investor participation in
equities and equity trading, and emphasizes the crucial importance of corporate
governance practices in India

3.4 Enforcing Corporate Governance Laws

Enforcement of corporate laws remains the soft underbelly of the legal and corporate
governance system in India. The World Bank’s Reports on the Observance of Standards and
Codes (ROSC) in its 2004 report on India (World Bank (2004)) found that while India
observed or largely observed most of the principles, it could do better in areas like the
contribution of nominee directors from financial institutions to monitoring and supervising
management; the enforcement of certain laws and regulations like those pertaining to stock
listing in major exchanges and insider trading as well as in dealing with violations of
the Companies Act the backbone of the corporate governance system in India. Some of
the problems arise because of unsettled questions about jurisdiction issues and powers of the
SEBI.

68
3.5 Indian Courts – an assessment
D jankov et al (2003) (DLLS) in their analysis of “formalism” in the judicial process around
the world, gave India a score of 3.34 on its formalism index, higher than the English-origin
average of 2.76 but slightly lower than the average for all countries. Among the 42 English-
origin countries in their sample, India has the11th highest level of formalism. India has the
16th longest process of evicting a tenant among English common law origin countries
(average 199 days). For collection on a bounced check, however, India has the 16 th
shortest duration (106days) among English common law origin countries (average 176
days). In both cases India’s total duration of the process is significantly shorter than
the overall mean duration of all the 109countries considered (254 for eviction of tenant and
234 for collecting on bounced check). Thus, in spite of its formalism, Indian courts do
not seem to perform that poorly (relatively speaking) on these two types of cases considered.
The DLLS assurance notwithstanding, case arrears and decade-long legal battles are
commonplace in India. In spite of having around 10,000 courts (not counting tribunals and
special courts), India has a serious shortfall of judicial service. While the USA has 107 judges
per million citizens, Canada over 75, Britain over 50 and Australia over 41, for India
the figure is slightly over 10 (Debroy (1999)). In April2003, for instance, the Supreme Court
of India had close to 25,000 cases pending before it (Parekh 2001). Hazra and Micevska
(2004) report that there are about 20 million cases pending in lower courts and another
3.2 million cases in high courts. A termination dispute contested all the way can take up to
20 years for disposal. Writ petitions in high courts can take between 8 and 20 years for
disposal. About 63% of pending civil cases are over a year old and 31% are over 3 years old.
Automatic appeals, extensive litigation by the government, underdeveloped alternative
mechanisms of dispute resolution like arbitration, the shortfall of judges all contribute to this
unenviable state of affairs in Indian courts. Since the same courts try both civil and criminal
matters and the latter gets priority, economic disputes suffer even greater delays.

69
3.6 The Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) sector in India
Allen et al (2006) conduct surveys to study the extent to which the formal legal environment
directly supports and regulates businesses, particularly small and medium enterprises which
form an increasingly important part of the Indian industry. This seems to indicate that the
small firms sector operate in a system virtually governed through informal mechanisms based
on trust, reciprocity and reputation with little recourse to the legal system and deals with wide
spread corruption. Over 80% of the firms surveyed needed a license to start a business, and
for about half of them obtaining it was a difficult process. Government officials were most
often the problem solved usually through payment of bribes or friends of government
officials to negotiate. Clearly, networks and connections are of crucial importance in
negotiating the government bureaucracy. As for conducting day-to-day business, legal
concerns are far less important to them than the unwritten codes of the informal networks in
which firms operate. In cases of default and breach of contract, the primary concern is loss of
reputation, followed closely by loss of property, with the fear of legal consequences being the
least important concern. About half of the firms surveyed did not have a regular legal adviser
and less than half of those that did had lawyers in that capacity. For mediation in a business
dispute or to enforce a contract, the first choice was “mutual friends or business partners”.
Only 20% of the respondents mentioned going to courts as the first option indicating that the
legal system, while not as effective as the informal mechanisms, is not altogether absent. The
informal system, however, is not perfect in resolving disputes and has its costs. About half of
the respondents experienced a breach of contract or non- payment with a supplier or major
customer in the past three years. Over a third of them renegotiated while over 40% did
nothing but continued the business relationships with the offending parties .In general, the
business environment of the SME sector is marked by strong informal mechanisms like
family ties, reputation and trust. Legal remedies though present, are far less important than
the rules of the informal networks.

70
 CHAPTER 4 – CAPITAL MARKETS
4.1 INTRODUCTION:
Indian capital markets have been one of the best performing markets in the world in the last
few years. Fuelled by strong economic growth and a large inflow of foreign institutional
investors (FIIs) as well as the development of the domestic mutual funds industry, the Indian
stock market indices have delivered truly explosive growth during the last 5 years rising over
3 times during the period. However, it would be a mistake to think that growth has happened
only in valuation. During this period Indian capital markets have exhibited explosive growth
in almost every respect. While the two major Indian exchanges, the Bombay Stock Exchange
(BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) ranked 16th and 17th respectively among
exchanges around the world in terms of market capitalization. The former has close to 5,000
stocks listed, of which about half actually trade. In terms of concentration (i.e. the share of
top 5% of stocks in total trading) they are not out of line with other major exchanges, though
in terms of turnover velocity, BSE is the lowest among the top 20 exchanges. The relatively
newly formed NSE has overtaken the more traditional BSE (which is older than the Tokyo
Stock Exchange) and now has over 30% higher turnover in terms of value and almost 2.5 times
BSE‟s turnover in terms of number of trades depicts the evolution of liquidity in Indian capital
markets in recent years. The regional stock exchanges in India, numbering 20, have recently
been relatively speaking devoid of action. In March 2006, the BSE market capitalization
accounted for about 86% of Indian GDP while that of the NSE accounted for about80%. In
terms of risk and return, while the Indian markets have been more volatile than those in
industrialized nations, there turns have been largely commensurate. In the new century, a
huge derivative market has been created from scratch, foreign institutional investors have
almost doubled in number, growth, and the number of portfolio managers has risen
over three-fold. The entire industry has therefore gone through a major transformation during
the period. During 2005-06, Indian corporations mobilized over Rs. 1237 trillion ($
30.93trillion) from the markets (which accounted for close to 4% of the GDP at factor cost in
current prices) of which close to 78% was debt, all of which was privately placed Of equity
issues amounting to over Rs. 273 trillion ($ 6.825 trillion), about40% were IPOs and the
remainder seasoned offerings. Close to 25% of these latter were rights offerings.

71
Qualitatively, these proportions have remained more or less table over the years. The
liberalization and subsequent growth of the Mutual Funds industry, for decades monopolized
by the state-owned Unit Trust of India (UTI), since the turn of the century has been one of
major stories of Indian capital markets .From the turn of the century, assets under
management have more than tripled, in pace with and fuelling the rise of the markets. The
biggest development in the Indian capital markets in recent years is undoubtedly the
introduction of derivatives futures and options both on indexes as well as individual stocks
with turnovers growing 50 to 70 times in the past 5years and the derivatives segments quickly
becoming a crucial part of the Indian capital markets. The rapid growth in Indian capital
markets and the spread of “equity culture” has doubtlessly strained its infrastructure
and regulatory resources. Nevertheless the securities market watchdog, the Securities and
Exchanges Board of India (SEBI) has maintained a rate of around 95% in redressing
investor grievances reported to it , though investigations undertaken and convictions obtained
have, on a proportional basis, trailed those of the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) of
the USA .
4.2 Institutional Features
The transactions in secondary markets like NSE and BSE go through clearing at clearing
corporations (National Securities Clearing Corporation Limited (NSCCL) for NSE trades, for
instance) where determination of funds and securities obligations of the trading members and
settlement of the latter take place. All the securities are being traded and settled under T+2
rolling settlement. “Dematerialized”, trading of securities, i.e. paper-less trading using
electronic accounts, now accounts for virtually all equity transactions. This was introduced to
reduce the menace of fake and stolen securities and to enhance the settlement efficiency, with
the first depository (National Security Depository Limited established for NSE in 1996.
This ushered the era of paperless trading and settlement. Table 3.9 shows the progress
of dematerialization at NSDL and delivery pattern of various stock exchanges in India. As
a measure of investor protection, exchanges in India (both the NSE and BSE) administer
price bands and also maintain strict surveillance over market activities in illiquid and volatile
stocks. Besides, NSCCL has put in place an online monitoring and there is being
inspected every year to verify their level of compliance with various rules.

72
4.3 Debt Market
The debt market in India has remained predominantly a wholesale market. During2005-2006,
the government and corporate sector collectively has mobilized Rs 2.6trillion from the
primary debt market. Of which, 69.6% were raised by government and the market,
government securities dominate. The secondary market for corporate bonds is practical. At
the end of March 2006, the total market capitalization of securities available for trading at the
WDM segment stood at over Rs 15 trillion. Of this government securities and state
loans together accounted for 83% of total market capitalization. Government of India, public
sector units and corporations together comprise as dominant issuer of debt markets in India.
Local governments, mutual funds and international financial institution issue debt
instruments as well but very infrequently. The Central Government mobilizes funds mainly
through issue of dated securities and T bills. Bonds are also issued by government sponsored
institutions like the development financial institutions (DFIs) like IFCI and IDBI, banks
and public sector units. Some, but not all, of the PSU bonds are tax-exempt. The corporate
bond market comprise of commercial papers and bonds. In recent years, there has been an
increase in issuance of corporate bonds with embedded put and call options. The major part
of debt is privately placed with tenors of 1-12 years. Government securities include Fixed
Coupon Bonds, Floating Rate Bonds, Zero Coupon Bonds, and T-Bills. The secondary
market trades are negotiated between participants with SGL (Subsidiary General Ledger)
accounts with RBI. The Negotiated Delivery System (NDS) of RBI provides electronic
platform for negotiating trades. Trades are also executed on electronic platform of the
Wholesale Debt Market (WDM) segment of NSE. The average trade size in this market has
hovered around Rs. 70 million and while turnover has risen significantly, the rise has not
been uniform. Central and State governments together have borrowed Rs 1.8 trillion and
repaid over Rs 680 billion ($ 17 billion) during 2005-06. Out of this over Rs 1.3 trillion was
raised by central government through dated securities. On a net basis, the government has
borrowed over Rs 953 billion through dated securities and only slightly over Rs 28 billion
through 364-day T-Bills. The net borrowings of State governments in 2005-06amounted to
slightly over Rs 154 billion ($ 3.85 billion).The yield on primary issues of dated government
securities during 2005-06 varied between 6.69 % and 7.98 % against the range of 4.49% to

73
8.24 % during [Link] weighted average yield on government dated securities increased
to 7.34%from 6.11% in 2004-05. At about 2% of the GDP, the corporate bond market in
India is small, marginal, and heterogeneous in comparison with corporate bond market in
developed countries. While a corporate debt market in India has existed in India since 1950s,
the bulk of the debt has been raised through private placements. In 2004-05, close to Rs
593 billion was raised by the corporate sector through debt instruments, of which private
placements accounted for around 93 %. In 2005-06, the entire amount of over Rs 794 billion
($ 19.85 billion) was raised by 99 issuers through 362 privately placed issues, with no public
issues at all. Figure 3.3 shows the growth of private placement debt in India. Financial
Institutions and banks dominate in private placements, issuing 75% of the total private
placement of debt (Refer Figure 3.4). Around 68.12 % of the resources mobilized by private
placement were distributed to Financial and Banking sector and 9.64 % to Power sector,
while distribution to Telecommunications and Water resources together was less than 1 %.
During2005-06, the maturity profile of issues in private placements ranged between
12months to 240 months. To promote the corporate debt market, especially secondary market
regulators have taken several steps. Corporate Debt instruments are traded both on BSE and
on capital market and the WDM segments of the NSE. SEBI has already mandated that all
bonds traded on the BSE and NSE be executed on the basis of price/order matching. So,
the difference between trading of government securities and corporate debt market securities
is that the latter are traded on the electronic limit order book like equities. Since June 2002,
the CDSL and NSDL have admitted debt instruments such as debentures, bonds, CPs CDs,
etc. Also, banks, financial institutions and primary dealers have been asked to hold bonds and
debentures, privately placed or other wise, in electronic form. As on March 2006, over Rs 3.3
trillion ($ 82.5 billion) worth of bonds/debentures were available in paperless (electronic)
form consisting of 652 issuers with 17,508 debentures/bonds and 379 issuers with 7,357
issues of commercial paper. In terms of market participants, apart from investors and brokers,
there were Primary Dealers8 at the end of March 2006. During 2005-06, banks (Indian and
Foreign) accounted for 42% of the WDM turnover, while primary dealers accounted for 21%
of the total turnover (Refer Figure 3.5). In recent years mutual funds have emerged as an
important investor class in the debt market. They also raise funds through the debt market.
Most mutual funds have specialized debt funds such as gilt funds and liquid funds. Foreign
Institutional Investors (FIIs) are also permitted to invest in treasury and corporate bonds, but
up to a limit. Provident and pension funds are large investors in debt market, predominantly

74
in treasury and PSU bonds. They are, however, not very active traders owing largely
to regulatory restrictions.

4.4 Derivatives Market

The derivatives segment in India is not very old. In the year 2000, NSE started its operation
in derivatives contracts and introduced futures contracts on the Nifty index Intermediaries
in government securities. The total exchange traded derivatives volume witnessed an increase
(88.14%) to over Rs 48 trillion ($ 1.2 trillion) during 2005-06 as against Rs 25.6 trillion
during the preceding year. In terms of products, Stock and Index Futures contracts together
account for 89 % of the total turnover in derivatives. Over the period, however, the basket of
instruments has widened with futures and option contracts on indices viz. CNX IT Index, and
Bank index as well as options and futures on122 single stocks. The popularity of single-stock
futures distinguishes the Indian derivatives market. In 2005, the NSE of India ranked first
(1st) in the single stock future category with 68,911,754 contracts. In India, though trades
in derivatives contracts have been permitted in both the BSE and NSE, the latter has
completely dominated the segment with over 99.9% of the turnover At any point of time,
for equity derivatives, contracts with one month, two month and three months to expiry are
available for trading. These contracts expire on the last Thursday of the respective expiry
months. Interest rate Futures rate contracts are also available on Notional 10 year bonds (6%
coupon), Notional 10 year zero coupon bonds and Notional 91 day T-Bills. These contracts
are available for a period of one year maturity with three months continuous contracts and
fixed quarterly contracts for the entire year. Index futures/options naturally have to settle in
cash. Previously futures and options on individual stocks could be settled through deliveries
but currently they have mandatory cash settlement as well. In the case of futures, contracts
usually have two types of settlements, MTM settlement which happen on a continuous basis
at the end of each day and final settlement, which is on the last trading day of the futures
contract. In contrast, options contracts have three types of settlements, daily premium
settlement; interim exercise settlement in the case of option contracts on securities; and final
settlement. As a part of its comprehensive risk containment mechanism for futures and
Options, the NSCCL (National Securities Clearing Corporation Limited) has quite stringent
capital adequacy requirements for membership in terms of. The initial margin requirement on
contracts that are specified and which need to be met on a daily basis. It also follows the Ver.

75
based margin requirement computed through the SPAN (Standardized Portfolio Analysis of
Risk) model of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange

4.5 Recent FII flows to India

In 2005-06 portfolio investments in India accounted for about 61.7% of total foreign
investment in the country and at about 1.29% of GDP well exceeded the current account deficit
(0.95% of GDP). Foreign Institutional Investors‟ (FIIs‟) investments accounted for about 97.5% of
this. Ever since the opening of the Indian equity markets to foreigners, FII investments have
steadily grown from about Rs. 2,600crores ($ 650 million) in 1993 to over Rs.48,000crores ($
12 billion) in 2005. At the end of June 2006, the cumulative FII flows to India accounted for
a little over 9% of the Bombay Stock Exchange market capitalization. While it is generally
held that portfolio flows benefit the economies of recipient countries, policy-makers
worldwide have been more than a little uneasy about such investments. Often referred to as
“hot money”, they are known to stampede out at the slightest hint of trouble in the host
country leaving an economic wreck in their wake, like Mexico in 1994. They have been
blamed for exacerbating small economic problems in a country by making large and
concerted withdrawals at the first sign of economic weakness. They have also been held
responsible for spreading financial crises – causing „contagion‟ in international financial
markets. International capital flows and capital controls have emerged as important policy
issues in the Indian context as well. The danger of abrupt reversals and their destabilizing
consequences on equity and foreign exchange markets are always a concern. Nevertheless, in
recent years, the government has been making strong efforts to increase FII flows in India.
Others (Rakshit (2006)) have argued that, far from being healthy for the economy, FII
inflows have actually imposed certain burdens on the Indian economy. Understanding the
determinants and effects of FII flow sand devising appropriate regulation therefore constitute
an important part of economic policy making in India.

76
4.6 A few stylized facts about FII flows to India
Over the last few years, research has brought to light a few important features of FII flows to
India. The key question has been the relationship between FII flow sand returns in the Indian
markets. Clearly FII equity investments and the stock market performance in India have been
very closely interlinked. Also both variables experience a sharp break around April of 2003
after which they ramp up steeply. The association is unmistakable – the correlation of
monthly net FII equity in flows and monthly Sensex returns is 0.49 since April 2003 and 0.30
in the over all. However, research seems to suggest they are more of an effect than a cause of
stock market performance. Analyzing daily flow data during 1999, Chakrabarti concludes
that in the post-Asian crisis period, stock market performance has been the sole driver of FII
flows, though monthly data in the pre-Asian crisis period may suggest some reverse
causality. This return-chasing behaviour has been confirmed using daily data during 1999-
2002 in Mukherjee et al(2002), which also finds that the sales of Indian securities by FIIs are
affected by returns but not purchases. On the other hand, Gordon and Gupta (2003) analyze
monthly data over the period 1993-2000 to conclude that FII flows are negatively related to
lag stock market returns, suggesting negative feedback trading. There are, however, issues
about the appropriateness of using monthly data in this analysis (Rakshit (2006)). In any case,
given that there is a structural break in the data around April 2003, careful analysis of more
recent data would be instructive in understanding the nature of the relationship and causality,
if any, between these two variables. The largest single-month pull-out of FII funds happened
in May2006 when the FIIs withdrew over Rs. 8247crores ($1.7billion) followed by the first
three weeks of August 2007 Rs. 5994crores ($ 1.47 billion). These were also the months
marked with major declines in the Sensex in the post reforms era. As for other features,
Chakrabarti (2001) finds no evidence of any informational disadvantage for foreign
investor’s vis-à-vis their domestic counterparts. The Asian crisis marked a regime shift of the
Indian market with the American S&P 500 index seemed to inversely affect FII flows to
India, but the effect disappeared in the post-crisis period. India’s country risk rating did not
seem to affect FII flows. Mukherjee et al (2002) have questioned the diversification motive
behind FII flows to India and report auto correlation or inertia in FII flows. Gordon and

77
Gupta (2003) report that FII flows are sensitive to the London Inter-bank Offer Rate (LIBOR)
as well as India’s macroeconomic fundamentals. Coondoo and Mukherjee (2004) argue
that both the stock market as well as FII flows in India have high and related volatility.
Finally, in their analysis of the effects of regulatory measures on FII flows, Bose and
Coondoo find that liberalizing policy changes have had an expansionary effect on FII flows
while restrictive measures aimed at giving regulators greater control over FII flows do not
necessarily dampen them.

78
 CHAPTER – 5 Banking Sector

5.1 INTRODUCTION
With deposits of over half a trillion US dollars, the Indian banking sector accounts for close
to three-quarters of the country’s financial assets. Over the decades, this sector has grown
steadily in size, measured in terms of total deposits, at a fairly uniform average annual growth
rate of about 18%. In the years since liberalization, several significant changes have occurred
in the structure and character of the banking sector – the most visible being perhaps
the emergence of new private sector banks as well as the entry of several new foreign banks.
The spirit of competition and the emphasis on profitability are also driving the public
sector banks towards greater profit-orientation in a departure from the socialistic approach
followed for decades. In general it seems that the emergence of the new private banks and the
increased participation of foreign banks have increased professionalism in the banking
sector. Competition has clearly increased with the Herfindahl index (a measure of
concentration) for advances and assets dropping by over 28% and about 20% respectively
between 1991-1992 and 2000-20019. Over the period, SBI, the largest Indian bank, witnessed
a decline in asset market share from 28% to 24% while its loan market share dropped from
27% to 22%. The deposit share, on the other hand, stayed pretty much the same at 23%. The
asset, loan and deposit shares of the top 10 banks all fell from close to 70% to below60%.
Nevertheless, the public sector banks still enjoy a pre-eminent position in Indian banking
today, accounting for over 80%of deposits and credit. There is, however, a noticeable trend of
private banks gradually eroding the market share of the public sector. Performance and
efficiency of commercial banks are key elements of the efficiency and efficacy of a country’s
financial sector. It is not surprising then, that considerable attention has been focused on the
performance of commercial banks in India in recent years. According to the general
perception as well as on several metrics, the “new” private sector banks and the foreign banks
have led the way in terms of efficiency. Public sector banks, still not entirely free from the
old bureaucratic mode of functioning and constrained by certain “developmental” lending
objectives, are often thought to be lagging behind in the race to efficiency. Bank privatization
and further liberalization of 9 Koeva (2003). The Herfindahl index is a measure of industry
concentration and is computed as the sum of the squared market shares of the firms in an

79
industry. Ranging between 0 and 10,000, a lower Herfindahl index represents less
concentration and greater competition. The banking sector including allowing bank mergers
are frequently discussed as remedies for the situation.
5.2 Performance of commercial banks in recent years
5.2.1 a brief background
The performance of commercial banks in India has been under policy and academic spotlight
for a while now with the public sector bank performance receiving the greatest attention. The
relatively poor performance of several public sector banks (PSBs) has led to calls for a
complete overhaul of these banks and privatization as a solution. Performance evaluation of
banks, particularly in an economy that is dominated by public sector banks that are not driven
purely by profit motive, however, is not a simple task. Profitability is definitely a key
measure of performance, but its use as the sole measure is disputed by many and several
alternative measures of efficiency have been used in the literature. Here we take a look at
a few of these measures to evaluate the performance of banks in the post-reforms era. A
caveat is in order here. A key issue in judging bank efficiency is the link between
management objectives and the selected measure of efficiency. As in any business, banks too
seek to maximize shareholder value as well as pursue strategic objectives. Banks at different
levels of market share frequently set differing objectives, so any measure other than Return
on Assets is fraught with comparability problems. In addition, more than in many
other businesses, risk management plays a crucial role in banking and it is, indeed, a difficult
task to figure out the riskiness of a bank’s operations without going through a detailed
analysis of its investments and loan portfolio. Across sectional comparison of relative bank
performance, as presented here, abstracts in a large measure from these considerations, which
are doubtless limitations of such analysis. The Return on Asset (Profit/Asset) it is evident that
foreign banks are, by far, the most profitable bank category in India. The non-SBI public
sector banks have consistently been the worst performers. There appears to have been a mild
improvement in the efficiency of the banking sector in general during the decade10 much of
which has been driven by improvements in performance of the 10 A conclusion also
supported by Koeva (2003) private and foreign banks. Within the private sector banks, the
“new” private sector banks, those that came up in the post-reforms era, seem to have driven
the efficiency gains. It is however, imperative to consider risk in evaluating a bank’s
performance. The riskiness of banking is not wholly reflected in the variation of its earnings.
This is obtained by dividing the average ROA of a bank group in a year by the (cross-

80
sectional) standard deviation of ROAs of banks in that group during that year. On this
criterion, the SBI group is an order of magnitude better than others, simply because of
its very low intra-group variability in earnings. However, banks in the SBI group are also
different from other banks in their lower decision-making independence from one another.
Among the three other groups, there does not seem to be any systematic pattern. If we
measure risk with time-series rather than cross-sectional standard deviation, however, then
the coefficients of variation. The significant stability of foreign banks on this score is worthy.
The “most risky” status of SBI when time-series variation in ROA is Considered while being the
“least risky” by far using cross-sectional variation as a measure of risk, suggests that the SBI
group may be distributing temporal shocks among the Constituent banks to maintain intra-
group parity and so should really be viewed as a single rather than a group. Another measure
of efficiency of the banking sector is the productivity of its personnel. This is not a “total
factor productivity” kind of measure, but rather just a measure of how well the human
resources are exploited by the banks. Clearly this figure would depend crucially with the
expenditure on non-human inputs that complement the efforts of the employees. A
measure of labour productivity in the banking sector is the ratio of “turnover” or the
total business generated as the sum of total deposits and advances to the total number of
employees. There has been improvement across all categories over the time period. However,
the foreign banks‟ turnover per employee is about five times that of the nationalized
[Link] impressive has been the relative surge of the private banks on this metric,
from below par when compared to the public sector banks at the beginning of the decade to
over twice as efficient as the nationalized banks in later years. Much of the relative poor
performance of the public sector banks stem from the fact that they are required to have
branches in rural areas all over the country that are largely cost centres. However public
sector banks are overstaffed even when their metro and urban area branches are considered.
However, when we look at the banks‟ turnover as a multiple of their employee cost rather
than number of employees, the difference is less marked. More importantly the Indian private
banks appear to have trounced the foreign banks on this score in the latter half of the decade.
Clearly the “new” private sector banks have been more successful in keeping their employee
costs down while raising turnover. Both the foreign and private banks hire fewer but more
expensive employees than their public sector counterparts. Foreign banks tend to
use information technology more intensively and practice banking. As for private banks,
their climb of the efficiency ladder has been driven almost exclusively by the new
private banks

81
–
ICICI Bank, UTI Bank (recently renamed Axis Bank), HDFC Bank etc.
–
That has followed the foreign bank-type staffing practices and business model with lower
clerical and subordinate staff strength. All these features have important policy implications
for the debate concerning restructuring and privatizing of public sector banks. There is also
the view, however, that ownership parse does not affect the operational efficiency of banks it
is the discipline of stock markets that make the traded private companies more efficient than
public sector banks. While the regulatory mechanism is frequently blamed for the lack
lustre performance of public sector banks, till 1996, deregulation had not resulted in
a productivity surge in public sector banks, though private banks improved performance.
Perhaps the best measure of a country’s financial health and robustness is the extent of non-
performing assets (NPAs) in its banking system. Broadly speaking, an on performing advance
is defined in India as one with interest or principal repayment instalment unpaid for a period
of at least two quarters. NPAs form a substantial drag for individual banks as well as the
banking system of a country. They represent the poor quality of the assets of the bank
and have to be provisioned for using capital. Obviously they have a huge negative impact on
a bank’s profitability and can lead to complete erosion of its asset base. As noted before
public sector banks have traditionally had higher levels of NPAs than private sector banks
and foreign banks. In recent years, however, they appear to have managed their NPAs well,
steadily reducing them tolevels comparable to those of private banks. On the other hand,
the new private sector banks have witnessed an increase in the share of NPAs in their
portfolios. A closer look at the cross-sectional distribution of NPAs among the different
banks .however, suggest that as a group, public sector banks have a tighter distribution than
other categories, particularly foreign banks which show considerably larger differnece in the
ratio of net NPAs to net advances. There is, however, scepticism some quarters about
the definition and measurement of NPAs in Indian banks. Banks often indulge in creative
accounting and loan rollovers “ever greening” – to keep the NPA figures artificially low16.
The share of a priori one would expect the threat of takeovers, rather than trading of shares to
improve efficiency, recent evidence suggests that Indian public sector companies listing only
a non-controlling part of the equity have experienced profitability and productivity
enhancements. Banks also face considerable interest rate risk in that a small rise in lending
rates could cause a considerable increase in the share of NPAs

82
a 2% rise in lending rates could cause a 4 percentage point increase in the share
of NPAs.17As the international NPA recognition standards as well as capital adequacy ratios
rules are replaced with the new, more complex supervisory system of Basel II, the banking
sector in India needs to pay even greater attention to properly identifying and controlling
NPAs. Chakrabarti & Chawla (2006) find that on a “value” or profitability basis, the foreign
banks, as a group, have been considerably more efficient than all other bank groups, followed
by the Indian private banks. From a “quantity” perspective
or on the basis of volume of deposits and credit created with given input levels, however,
Indian private banks have been the best performers while the foreign banks are the worst
performers. This suggests that the foreign banks have been “cherry picking” – focusing on
more lucrative segments of banking.

5.2.2 Corporate Governance

Corporate governance issues in India, as in any other country, are multidimensional. For
instance, the intricacies and opacity of conglomerates have been blamed for economic crises
like the Asian crisis. A glance at India’s 500 largest (by market-cap) companies, that together
account for over 90% of themarket capitalization of the country’s leading Bombay Stock
Exchange, reveals that about 60% of these companies(65% in terms of market capitalization),
are part of conglomerates, or what are called “business groups”. Clearly family-run business
groups still play a crucial role in the Indian corporate sector. Even in 2002, the
average shareholding of promoters in all Indian companies was as high as 48.1%. Recent
studies have documented the presence of “tunnelling” of funds among business groups in
India19. The actual ownership in these companies are far from transparent with widespread
pyramiding, cross-holding and the use of non-public trusts and private companies for owning
shares in group companies.

83
5.3 Corporate Governance in India
5.3.1 a historical background
The history of the development of Indian corporate laws has been marked by interesting
contrasts. At independence, India inherited one of the world’s poorest economies but one
which had a factory sector accounting for a tenth of the national product; four functioning
stock markets (predating the Tokyo Stock Exchange)with clearly defined rules governing
listing, trading and settlements; a well-developed equity culture if only among the urban rich;
and a banking system replete with well-developed lending norms and recovery procedures.20
In terms of corporate laws and financial system, therefore, India emerged far better end owed
than most other colonies. The 1956 Companies Act as well as other laws governing the
functioning of joint-stock companies and protecting the investors‟ rights built on this
foundation. The beginning of corporate developments in India were marked by the managing
agency system that contributed to the birth of dispersed equity ownership but also gave rise to
the practice of management enjoying control rights disproportionately greater than their stock
ownership. The turn towards socialism in the decades after independence marked by the 1951
Industries (Development and Regulation) Act as well as the 1956 Industrial Policy Resolution
put in place a regime and culture of licensing, protection and widespread red-tape that bred
corruption and stilted the growth of the corporate sector. The situation grew from bad to
worse in the following decades and corruption, nepotism and inefficiency became the
hallmarks of the Indian corporate sector. Exorbitant tax rates encouraged creative accounting
practices and complicated emolument structures to beat the In the absence of a developed
stock market, the three all-India development finance institutions (DFIs)
–
the Industrial Finance Corporation of India, the Industrial Development Bank of India and the
Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India
–
together with the state financial corporation’s became themain providers of long-term credit
to companies. Along with the government owned mutual fund, the Unit Trust of

84
India, they also held large blocks of shares in the companies they lent to and invariably had
representations in their boards, though they have traditionally played very passive roles in the
boardroom. Though financial disclosure norms in India have traditionally been superior to
most Asian countries, noncompliance with disclosure norms and even the failure of
Auditor’s reports to conform to the law attract nominal fines with hardly any punitive
action. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in India has not been known to take action
against erring auditors. While the Companies Act provides clear instructions for maintaining
and updating share registers, in reality minority shareholders have often suffered from
irregularities in share transfers and registrations. Sometimes non-voting preferential shares
have been used by promoters to channel funds and deprive minority shareholders of their dues.
Minority shareholders‟ rights have sometimes also been compromised by management’s private
deals in the relatively scarce event of corporate takeovers. Boards of directors have been
largely ineffective in India in their monitoring role, and their independence is more often than
not highly questionable. For most of the post-Independence era the Indian equity markets
were not liquid or sophisticated enough to exert effective control over the companies. Listing
requirements of exchanges enforced some transparency, but non-compliance was neither rare
nor acted upon. All in all therefore, minority shareholders and creditors in India remained
effectively unprotected despite the laws on the books.
5.3.2 Recent Developments in Corporate Governance in India
Concerns about corporate governance in India were, however, largely triggered by aspect of
crises in the early 1990‟s – the Harshad Mehta stock market scam of 1992 followed by
incidents of companies allotting preferential shares to their promoters at deeply discounted
prices as well as those of companies simply disappearing with investor’s money.
These concerns about corporate governance stemming from the corporate scandals as well as
opening up to the forces of competition and globalization gave rise to several investigations
into the ways to fix the corporate governance situation in India. One of the first among such
endeavours was the CII Code for Desirable Corporate Governance developed by a committee
chaired by Rahul Bajaj. The committee was formed in 1996 and submitted its code in April
1998. Later SEBI constituted two committees to look into the issue of corporate governance
–
the first chaired by Kumar Mangalam Birla that submitted its report in early 2000 and the
second by Narayana Murthythree years later. These last two committees have been
instrumental in bringing about far reaching changes in corporate governance requirements in

85
India through the formulation of the Clause 49 of Listing Agreements. Concurrent with the
initiatives by SEBI, the Department of Company Affairs, Ministry of Finance of
the Government of India has also been contemplating improvements in the corporate
governance area. These efforts include the establishment of a study group to operationalise
the Birla committee recommendations in 2000, the Naresh Chandra Committee on Corporate
Audit and Governance in 2002 and the Expert Committee on Corporate Law (the J.J. Irani
Committee) in the late 2004. All of these efforts were aimed at reforming the existing
Companies Act, 1956 that still formed the back bone of corporate law in India.

5.3.3 Clause 49 of the Listing Agreements

SEBI implemented the recommendations of the Birla Committee through the enactment of
Clause 49 of the Listing Agreements. This Clause 49 may well be viewed as a milestone in
the evolution of corporate governance practices in India. They were applied to companies in
the BSE 200 and S&P C&X Nifty indices, and all newly listed companies, on March 31,
2001; to companies with a paid up capital of Rs. 10crore ($ 2.5million) or with a net worth of
Rs. 25 crore ($ 6.25) at any time in the past five years, as of March 31, 2002; to other listed
companies with a paid up capital of over Rs. 3crore ($ 750,000) on March 31, 2003. The
Narayana Murthy committee worked on further refining the rules and Clause 49 was
amended in 2004. The key features of this amended Clause are discussed below. The major
mandatory areas of Clause 49 regulations are the following: (i) Composition of the
Board of Directors; (ii) the composition and functioning of the Audit Committee; (iii) the
governance and disclosures regarding subsidiary companies; (iv) Disclosures by the
company; (vi) CEO/CFO certification of financial results; (vi) Report on Corporate
Governance as part of the Annual Report; and (vii) certification of Compliance of a company
with the provisions of Clause [Link] composition and proper functioning of the Board
of Directors emerge as the key area of focus for Clause 49. It stipulates that non-executive
members should comprise at least half of a board of directors. It defines an “independent”
director and requires that independent directors comprise at least half of a board of directors
if the chairperson is an executive director and at least a third if the chairperson is a
nonexecutive director. It also lays down rules regarding compensation of board members;
sets caps on committee memberships and chairmanships; lays down the minimum number
and frequency of board meetings and mandates certain disclosures for board members.
Clause 49 pays special attention to the composition and functioning of the Audit Committee,

86
requiring at least three members on it, with an independent chair and with two-thirds made up
of independent directors and having at least one “financially literate” person on it. It lays
down the role and powers of the audit committee and stipulates the minimum number and
frequency of and the quorum at the committee meetings.
With regard to “material” non-listed subsidiary companies (i.e. turnover/net worth exceeding
20% of holding company’s turnover/net worth), Clause 49 stipulates the at least one
independent director of the holding company to serve on the board of the subsidiary. The
audit committee of the holding company should review the subsidiary’s financial statements
particularly investment plans. The minutes of the subsidiary’s board meetings should be
presented at the board meeting of the holding company and the board members of the latter
should be made aware of all “significant” (likely to exceed in value
10% of total revenues/expenses/assets/liabilities of the subsidiary) transactions entered
into bythe subsidiary. The areas where Clause 49 stipulates specific corporate disclosures are:
(i) related party transactions; (ii) accounting treatment; (iii) risk management procedures;
(iv) proceeds from various kinds of share issues; (v) remuneration of directors; (vi) a
Management Discussion and Analysis section in the Annual report discussing different heads
of general business conditions and outlook; (vii) background and committee memberships of
new directors as well as presentations to analysts. In addition a board committee with a non-
executive chair should address shareholder/investor grievances. Finally the process of share
transfer, a long-standing problem in India, should be expedited by delegating authority to an
officer or committee or to the registrar and share transfer agents. The CEO and CFO or their
equivalents need to sign off on the company’s financial statements and disclosures and accept
responsibility for establishing and maintaining effective internal control systems. The
company is required to provide a separate section of corporate governance in its annual report
with a detailed compliance report on also submit a quarterly compliance report to the stock
exchange where it is listed. Finally, it needs to get its compliance with the mandatory
specifications of Clause 49 certified by either the auditors or practicing company secretaries.
In addition to these mandatory requirements, Clause 49 also mentions non-mandatory
requirements concerning the facilities for a non-executive chairman, the remuneration
committee, half-yearly reporting of financial performance to shareholders, a move
towards unqualified financial statements, training and performance evaluation of board
members and perhaps most notably a clear “whistle blower” policy.

87
By and large, the provisions of Clause 49 closely mirror those of the Sarbanes-Oxley
measures in the USA. In some areas, like certification compliance, the Indian requirements
are even stricter. There are, however, areas of uniqueness too.
The distinction drawn between boards headed by executive and non-executive chairmen and
the lower required share of independent directors is special to India (and somewhat intriguing
too, given the prevalence of family-run business groups).

5.3.4 Recent findings about corporate governance in India

Of late, a burgeoning volume of empirical research has begun to document several interesting
features of corporate governance in India. We summarize some of the major findings in this
section. Corporate Boards in large companies in India in 2003 were slightly smaller than
those in the US in 1991 with 9.46 members on average as compared to 11.45 (Sarkar and
Sarkar 2005). While the percentage of inside directors was roughly comparable (25.38%
compared to 26% in the US), Indian boards had relatively fewer independent directors, (just
over 54% as compared to 60% in the US) and relatively more affiliated outside directors
(over 20% as compared to 14% in the USA). While 41% of Indian companies had a promoter
in the board, in over 30%of cases a Promoter served as an Executive Director. There is
evidence (Ghosh, S.,2006) that larger boards lead to poorer performance (market-based as
well as in accounting terms) in India as in the USA. The median director in large companies
in India held 4.28 directorships in 2003 (Sarkar and Sarkar, 2005a).The number is
considerably (and statistically significantly) higher for directors in group-affiliated
companies respectively. As for independent directors however, the median number of
positions held is 4.59 with no major differences between group and standalone companies.
Interestingly, independent directors with multiple directorships are associated with higher
firm value in India while busier inside directors are correlated negatively with firm
performance. Busier independent directors are also more conscientious in terms of attending
board meetings than their counterparts with fewer positions. As for inside directors, it seems
that the pressure of serving on multiple boards (due largely to the prevalence of family owned
business groups) does take a toll on the directors‟ performance.
However, busy independent directors also appear to be correlated with a greater degree
of earnings management as measured by discretionary accruals (Sarkar et al,2006). Multiple
positions and non-attendance of board meetings by independent directors seem to
be associated with higher discretionary accruals in firms. After controlling for these

88
characteristics of independent directors, board independence, i.e. proportion of independent
directors, does not seem to affect the degree of earnings management. However CEO-duality
(i.e. where the top executive also chairs the board) and the presence of controlling
shareholders as inside directors are related, perhaps unsurprisingly, to greater earnings
management. Shareholding patterns in India reveal a marked level of concentration in the
hands of the promoters individuals/family who started the company. In 2002-03, for
instance, promoters held 47.74% of the shares in a sample of close to 2500 listed
manufacturing companies (Sarkar and Sarkar, 2005) - 50.78% for group companiesand
45.94% for Stand alone firms. In comparison, the Indian public’s share amounted to 34.60%,
28% and 38.51% respectively. As for the impact of concentrated shareholding on firm
performance, Sarkar and Sarkar, 2000 find that in the mid-90‟s (1995-96) holdings above 25%
by directors and their relatives was associated with higher valuation of companies while there
was no clear effect below that threshold. More recently, based on 2001 data that distinguishes
between “controlling” insiders and non -controlling groups, Salerka, 2006 report a U-shaped
relationship between insider ownership – insider defined as promoters and “persons acting in
concert (PACs) with promoters” – and firm value with the point of inflection lying at a much
higher level – between 45% and 63%.Institutional investors comprising the government
sponsored mutual funds and insurance companies, banks and “development
financial institutions” (DFIs)That are also long-term creditors, and foreign institutional
investors, hold over 22%shares of the average large company in India, of which the share of
mutual funds, banks and FIs, insurance companies, and FIIs are about 5%, 1.5%, 3% and
11%respectively. Analyzing cross-section data of the mid-90‟s, Sarkar and Sarkar 2000
find that company value actually declines with a rise in the holding of mutual funds and
insurance companies in the range 0-25% holding after which there is no clear effect. On the
other hand, for DFIs‟ holdings, there is no clear effect on valuation below 25% but a
significant positive effect after the 25% mark, suggesting better monitoring when stakes are
higher. Whether these effects have stayed the same after the changes witnessed in the decade
that followed this period remains to be checked. Executive compensation in India is another
area of corporate governance that has received some attention among researchers. Since1993-
94 executive compensation has been freed from the strict regulation by the Companies Act.
Executive compensation in India often has two components – salary and performance-based
commission – apart from retirement and other benefits and perquisites. Based on an analysis
of unbalanced panel data of roughly300 firms in each year, Fagernäs (2007) reports that the
average total compensation (salary plus commission) of CEOs has risen almost three-fold

89
between 1998 and 2004 (from Rs. 2.1 million (approx. $48,500) to Rs. 6.4 million in real
terms. During this period, the proportion of profit-based commission has risen steadily from
13.4% to 25.6% and the proportion of CEOs with commission as part of the pay package has
risen from 0.34 to 0.51. So clearly, CEO pay has become more performance based during that
period. There is some evidence that this increasing performance-pay linkage is associated
with the introduction of the corporate governance code or Clause 49. Meanwhile
the commissions as a fraction of profits have also almost doubled from 0.55% to 1.06%. Also
finds that CEOs related to the founding family or directors are paid more than other CEOs.
In a firm fixed effects model, she finds being related to the founding family can raise CEO
pay by as much as 30% while being related to a director can cause an increase of about10%.
There is some evidence that the presence of directors from lending institutions lowers pay
while the share of non-executive directors on the board connects pay more closely
to performance. Ghosh (2006) finds that during 1997-2002, the average (of a sample of
462manufacturing firms) board compensation in India has been around Rs. 5.3 million
(approx. $120,000) with wide variation across firm size – average Rs. 7.6 million or $
171,000 for large firms and Rs. 2.5 million ($56,000) for small firms. The board
compensation also appears to be higher (average Rs. 6.9 million ($155,500)) if the CEO is
related to the founding family. Both board and CEO compensation depended on current
performance and the former depended on past-year performance as well. Also diversified
companies paid their boards more. Given that close to two-thirds of the top 500 Indian
companies are group affiliated, issues relating to corporate governance in business groups are
naturally very important in the Indian context. “Tunnelling” or “the transfer of assets and
profits out of firms for the benefit of those who control them”22 is a major concern in
business groups with pyramidal ownership structure and inter-firm cash flows. Bertrand
(2002) estimate that an industry shock leads to a 30% lower earnings increase for business
group firms compared to stand-alone firms in the same industry. They find that firms
lower down in the pyramidal structure are less affected by industry-specific shocks than those
nearer the top, suggesting that positive shocks in the former are siphoned off to the latter
helping the controlling shareholders but hurting the minority shareholders. However, Khanna
and Yafeh(2007) question how this logic would make them less sensitive to negative shocks.
There is also some evidence (e.g., Khanna and Palepu 2000) that firms associated with
business groups have superior performance than stand-alone firms. More recently Kali and
Sarkar (2007) argue that diversified business groups help increase the opacity of within-group
funds flow driving a wider wedge between control and cash flow rights and a greater degree

90
of diversification aids tunnelling. Using data for Indian firms in 385 business groups in 2002-
03 and 384 groups in2003-04 they find that firms with greater ownership opacity and lower
wedge between cash flow rights and control than those in a group’s core activity are likely to
be located away from the core activity. This incentive for tunnelling explains, according to
them, the persistence of sometimes value destroying groups in India and occasional heavy
investment by Indian groups in businesses with low contribution to group profitability. Indian
accounting standards provide considerable flexibility to firms in their financial reporting and
differ from the International Accounting Standards (IAS) in several ways that often makes
interpreting Indian financial statements a challenging task. These deviations, however, need
to be viewed in the right perspective. India still falls short of the median number of deviations
from IAS in the 49 country sample of Bae et al, 2007. The nature of corporate governance
can arguably affect the capital structure of a company. In the presence of well functioning
financial institutions, debt can be a disciplining mechanism in the hands of shareholders or
an expropriating mechanism in the hands of controlling insider. Studying the relationship
between leverage and Tobin‟ Q in 1996, 2000and 2003, Sarkar and Sarkar (2005b) conclude
that the disciplinary effect has been more marked in recent years with greater market
orientation of institutions. They also find limited evidence of the use of debt as an
expropriating mechanism in group companies. The market for corporate control has
been relatively limited in India till the mid-1990‟s when the average number of mergers per
year leapt from
30 between 1973-74 and 1987-88 and 63 between 1987-88 and 1994-95 to171 between 1994-
95 and 2002-03 (Agarwal and Bhattacharya, 2006). Merger activity appears to occur in
waves and is split roughly evenly between inter-industry and intra-industry mergers.
The share of group affiliated mergers has increased significantly in the post 1994-95 periods.

5.4 Microfinance in India

The microfinance sector is clearly one of the fastest growing segments of theIndian financial
sector, and also one where such growth is sustainable for a verylong period of time. In spite
of a large banking sector, about 40% of the Indian population does not have bank accounts.
Given that over 75% of the Indian population still lives below $2 a day, and a vast majority in
rural areas, microfinance – the provision of thrift savings, credit and other financial products
and services at a very scale to the poor to enable them to raise their income and improve
living standards – is key to financial inclusion in India. Traditionally, micro-credit in India

91
has been the domain of village money-lenders, generally at exploitative interest rates that
impoverished borrowers. While special emphasis on rural and small loans has existed in India
at least since the 1960s and India’s apex specialized rural credit agency, the National Bank
for Agricultural and Rural Development (NABARD) was established in 1982, micro finance
in India has witnessed a dramatic increase in recent years with the involvement a large
number of private players in addition to the government. Providers of microfinance in India
today include specialized country-level institutions like NABARD, the Small Industrial
Development Bank of India (SIDBI) and that Rashtriya Mahila Kosh (RMK); commercial
banks – both private and state-owned; regional rural banks; cooperative banks as well as non-
banking financial companies (NBFCs). While non-profits (NGOs) have often played a
key role in the formation of microfinance institutions(MFIs), the contribution
of governmental thrust in scaling microfinance (largely through the self-help group model)
has, at the end of the day, reached a far higher number of people. Of late, with the realization
of the profit opportunities in the sectors and the spectacular growth in the past half
decade, microfinance in India is beginning to attract for-profit funding from commercial
banks as well as from venture capital firms, both domestic and foreign. Though microfinance
in India, as in most other places, is generally lauded as the success of private enterprise, the
role of the government in scaling and mainstreaming microfinance cannot be overlooked in
India, particularly in the SHG Bank Linkage Program. In 2000, two-thirds of SHGs in India
were promoted by NGOs. Now around half of them are promoted by government, less then
third is promoted by NGOs and rest by banks. SEWA, one of the pioneers of microfinance in
India took 35years to reach membership of 0.8 million women, but in contrast the
government of the Southern state of Andhra Pradesh took 15 years to mobilize 8
millionwomen23. The Swarnajayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana (SGSY), perhaps the biggest
government program promoting SHGs anywhere in the world was launched in 1997, and
generated over 0.34 million SHG loan applications in 2006-07 alone.

5.5 Outreach and recent growth

The Self-Help Group (SHG) model of group-lending and linking of such groups(almost
always of women) to banks has been the predominant model of microfinance in India
connecting about 14 million poor households to banks in
March 2006 and providing indirect banking access to an equal number. Loans from micro-
financial institutions (MFIs) have reached about 7.3 million households among which about

92
45% are poor. Together these two models appear to have touched about a quarter of the
Indian poor. The SHG Bank Linkage Program (SBLP) – dominant microfinance model in
India – had, in March 2006, an average loan size of Rs 2,684 ($67.1) for fresh loans and
Rs 4,497 ($112.42) for repeat loans per group member with average group size of 14
members. In the five years from 2001 to 2006 outreach and loan volume in this model had
witnessed close to nine-fold increases. While the quantity of bank loan disbursed shot up
from Rs 481crores ($ 120.25 million) to Rs 4, 499crores ($ 1.12 billion), outreach expanded
from 0.26 million to 2.2 million SHGs, making it the largest such program in the world.
During the period, average loan size almost doubled from Rs19, 379 ($ 484.5) per SHG to Rs
37, 574 ($ 939.4) per SHG in 2006, the average size of repeat loans grew almost three-fold
from Rs 22,215 ($ 555.4) in 2001 to Rs62, 960 ($ 1,574) in 2006. The alternative model of
microfinance institutions (MFIs) has produced the success stories and poster organizations of
Indian microfinance. MFIs are of diverse legal forms and it is difficult to estimate their exact
number. Sa-dhan, an association of MFIs in India has 162 members with outstanding loan
portfolio of Rs 1600crores ($ 400million) in March 2006. While the number of MFIs in India
is probably well in excess of 800, top 20 MFIs in India account for about 95% of their
aggregate loan portfolio.
Microfinance in India also exhibits tremendous regional disparities. It is fair to say that
microfinance in India is largely a “southern” affair. In 2005 about 83% of the
Households reached by microfinance were in the Southern states. Eastern India came next
with 13% of the households while the West accounted for less than 1%.While conscious
efforts are afoot to rectify this regional bias, it is likely to take awhile before the regional
distribution of microfinance approaches uniformity. In terms of the products and services,
apart from micro loans, the microfinance sector in India focuses on micro-savings and
financial literacy among the poor – developing the habit and discipline of saving – and, more
recently have begun, in a relatively small way, to introduce micro-insurance. Individual and
group level insurance is now being offered, in limited areas of both life and non-life types. A
study on micro insurance products by ILO in 2003-04, identified 83 insurance products
provided by insurance companies; half of them were life products. Out of those 24 were
addressed to individuals and rest to the groups. Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) of India, (a
public sector insurance company) provides both individual and group insurance. Various
private sector insurance companies also provide these kinds of insurance products. In
2002, the Indian microfinance institution BASIX and AVIVA jointly designed a group
insurance product to provide life insurance to all BASIX credit customers. Other than life

93
risk, rural household faces health risk, risk to agricultural activity, risk to live-stock, risk to
assets used in nonfarm activities. Crop insurance and Life stock insurance are two common
non-life insurance products offered by General Insurance Corporation (GIC) of India
(Public sector insurance company). But the delivery of the above products has been restricted
to beneficiaries of various government sponsored schemes and there has been little
active participation by insurers to deliver these products on a larger scale. The situation
has improved somewhat after the opening of the insurance sector to private sector companies.
For instance, in 2003, BASIX and ICICI Lombard introduced a rainfall insurance product,
which was rolled over to six states by the year 2005. Finally, transferring money, particularly
for migrant workers, is another area where micro-finance institutions are making an entry.

5.6 The performance of the larger MFIs in India

The weighted average ROA for these MFIs is 2.1% with considerable variability. The range
is from a low of 0.74% to a high of over 9%.The ROEs are extremely variable as well,
ranging from slightly over 8% to over 173%, with a weighted average of 25.6%. The asset-
weighted average loan balance is slightly over $ 108 with profit margins ranging from below
4% to above 60%.Clearly even among these largest players, the level of variability makes
it difficult to generalize performance. However, it also shows that done properly, a
microfinance institution can be a profitable enterprise. It is possible that
higher profitability may come at the price of lower outreach and that MFIs experience a
“mission drift”. While data on the poverty level of clients is not uniformly available, all of
these MFIs, with the exception of BASIX have over 98% of their lending to women
borrowers. Given the negative correlation between the average loan size and the ROA and
ROE figures, it may not be such a major concern .A study by Sa-dhan in 2005 (using a
sample of 74 MFIs) reflects that these MFIs performed well in terms of sustainability, asset
quality, and efficiency. Evidence found that, large MFIs were the efficient users of funds,
extending 81 % of their total assets as loans, while this figure is 75 % for medium and small
MFIs. A report by MIX Markets (MIX (2006)) highlighted the inverse relationship between
growth and size with young MFIs growing faster than the mature MFIs. The report shows
that medium MFIs are sustainable and have positive returns on assets and equity. It also
shows that the small MFIs are more efficient, with lower unit cost ratios comparing to
medium sized MFIs The MIX report on MFIs in South Asia24, points out that MFIs in India
are unique in leveraging the borrowed funds. The average capital asset ratio in India is 11%,

94
which is half of the average of South Asia. Indian MFIs share the feature of providing loans
from voluntary deposits with Bangladesh. Around 8.4% of total loans funded from voluntary
deposits, hence provide another financial service „Saving‟ along with credit. Performance
and Transparency: A Survey of Microfinance in South Asia like Bangladesh, staff costs in the
Indian microfinance sector are also one of the lowest in the world. In terms of interest
charged, Indian MFIs are among the highest in the South Asia region, which, however, has
one of the lowest averages in the world. Thus by international standards, interest rates in
microfinance in India, are pretty low. Nevertheless, because of cases of multiple farmer
suicides in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, reportedly owing to extreme indebtedness,
MFIs have come under government pressure to reduce interest rates.

5.7 Financing of MFIs in India

5.7.1Commercial Ba nks
The growth of MFIs in the recent past has attracted most of the private sector banks. In the
1990‟s most of the MFIs lending comes from FWWB and SIDBI. Earlier banks used to
lend at the level of priority sector lending obligations, but now they have found lending to
MFIs being profitable, with almost perfect repayment rates. For the last three years,
commercial bank lending almost doubled in every year. Outstanding figures of responding
banks at the end of 2006. Banks provide both term loans and cash credit. The rate of interest
charged range from8.5 to 11% for tenor ranging from 3 months to 5 years. For MFIs lacking
track record, personal guarantees are also taken for security. ICICI bank (the largest private
bank and second largest bank in India) has the largest outstanding credit accounting for over
80% of the total commercial bank lending to MFIs. About 60% of this lending is based on
the “partnership model” where MFIs function as social intermediary providing loan
origination, monitoring and collection services, for a fee. But the MFI partner is expected to
share the risk of default up to some specified level. Another way of lending adopted by ICICI
is that of portfolio buy-out. Under deals with certain MFIs, the bank has bought out their
portfolio, for amounts on which MFIs are charged 9 %. Apart from lending, ICICI bank has
taken the initiative of using technology, like low cost ATMs, mobile phone banking, internet
services and others that help automate cash transactions in the field. In January 2006, the
Reserve Bank of India (RBI) specified guidelines for inclusion of certain agencies along
with MFIs as intermediaries. The intermediaries were supposed to work on the basis of two
models: the Business Facilitator Model(BFM) and the Business Correspondent Model

95
(BCM). Under the BFM, NGOs, Cooperatives, Post Offices, Insurance agents and
community based organizations work as intermediaries.
These intermediaries would perform the “last mile” services – activities like, identification of
borrowers, creating awareness about savings, processing and submission of loan applications
and follow up for recoveries. While under the BCM model, intermediaries include NGOs and
MFIs registered under the Trusts Act, not-for-profit companies (“Section 25 companies” in
India) and Post Offices.
In addition to BFM activities, the intermediaries perform the following additional activities:
Disbursal of small value credit, recovery of principal, collection of interest, Sale of micro
insurance and mutual fund products. The banks may pay reasonable commissions or fees to
the intermediaries for these services. Shortage of MFIs with requisite capacity and regulatory
anomalies, among other things, constrain lending to MFIs by commercial banks.
The probation on banks from charging more than PLR (of 11-13 %) on loans less than Rs 2
lakh ($ 5,000)and charges and commissions (over the PLR ) on loans less than Rs 25,000 ($
625)increases the cost of funds for banks and made the BC model unworkable.

5.7.2 Venture Capital Funds

More recently, venture capital funds (VCFs)

Both Indian and off-shore – are entering the microfinance sector in India. the top ten VCFs
investing in India on the basis of their total MFI investment worldwide. These VCFs have
helped reduce the problems faced by start-ups and emerging MFIs. According to an estimate
by M-CRIL (2006), the current equity deficit of sample MFIs is Rs 23crores ($ 5.75 million)
and their total equity fund requirement is expected to be Rs 1,100crores ($ 275million) by
2010. VCF entry into the microfinance sector in India is a recent phenomenon. Till
Bellwether registered in India in 2005, SIDBI Foundation for Micro Credit (SFMC) was the
sole (and far from effective) major provider of equity capital to the sector. In the 2005-
2006 budget, the size of NABARD‟s MFDEF (Microfinance Development & Equity Fund) was
doubled from Rs 100crores ($25 million) to Rs 200crores ($ 50 million). The instruments
preferred by VCFs have included both loans and equity and can broadly be classified (using
Bellwether‟s segmentation) as the following – Tier I: Equity investment in start-ups and

96
big established MFIs; Tier II: Convertible debt provided to high potential NGOs-MFIs; Tier
III: Debt to NGOs. The involvement of the famous venture capitalist Vinod Khosla has also
generated considerable exposure to the sector.

5.8 The regulatory environment

It is fair to say that microfinance in India has evolved so far largely in (an darguably because
of) an absence of sector-specific regulations. While each player, according to its institutional
status, was regulated by its respective apex body(frequently the central bank, the Reserve
Bank of India) very little regulation specifically targeted at microfinance was in effect.
That is likely to change soon with the introduction of a microfinance bill, currently in the
Indian Parliament. The objective of the Microfinance Regulation Bill is to register and
regulate the trusts and registered societies promoting and helping SHGs. The bill has two
broad objectives: (a) to promote and regulate the micro finance sector and (b) to permit Micro
Financial Organizations (MFOs) to collect deposits from „eligibleclients‟. The bill
Defines an MFO as any organization that provides microfinance services and includes
Defined as any member of an SHG or any group formed to provide microfinance services to
certain categories of people. The categories include (a) any farmer owning a maximum of
two hectares of agricultural land; (b) agricultural cultivators such as oral lessees and share
croppers; (c) landless and migrant labourers; (d) artisans and micro entrepreneurs; and (e)
women societies, trusts, and co-operative societies. The definition excludes SHG and groups
of SHGs. The financial assistance to „eligible client‟ by these MFOs cannot exceed (a) Rs
50,000 ($ 1,250) in aggregate per individual for small and tiny enterprise, agriculture, and
allied activities or (b) Rs 1.5 lakh ($ 3,750) in aggregate per individual for housing purposes.
The bill seeks to bring the entire micro finance sector under the surveillance of The National
Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development (NABARD). It will be
NABARD‟s role to promote and ensure the orderly growth of micro financial services by
formulating policies for transparency, facilitating the development of rating norms and by
specifying accounting norms and auditing norms. To offer thrift (savings) services to eligible
clients, an MFO will need to obtain a certificate of registration from NABARD. Every MFO
has to create a reserve fund by transferring a minimum of 15% of its net profit or surplus
realized out of thrift services and micro finance services. NABARD may direct that this
fund be invested in specified securities. Also, NABARD shall constitute a Micro Finance

97
Development and Equity Fund to be utilized for the development of the micro finance
[Link] Fund would be managed by the Board of Directors of NABARD and would be
used to provide any financial assistance to an MFO, invest in equity of an MFO, and meet
any other expenses for the promotion of the micro finance sector. The proposed bill seeks to
regulate the trusts and cooperative societies promoting and helping SHGs, not SHGs
themselves. However, SHGs are also cooperatives organized to provide certain services to its
members more economically. These SHGs cannot register themselves as cooperatives
because according to state government and RBI, there can be only one cooperative credit
society in a village. Since these SHGs are not legal entities, so they cannot put money in bank
in the name of SHG, but in the name one or two members creating room for fraud. The
unsettled issues about the bill includes: (a) whether MFOs are the appropriate vehicle to
address credit needs of the poor; (b) whether NABARD is the appropriate body to regulate
the sector, given that it itself is a 26 The Fund would include (a) all grants received from the
government and other sources; (b) any income received from investments made in equity of
an MFO; and (c) the balance outstanding in the Fund maintained by NABARD before the
commencement of the Act.

98
 CHAPTER – 6 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

6.1 INTRODUCTION

Data analysis is a crucial component of this research project as it helps in systematically

examining the Indian financial system, its challenges, and opportunities. The primary goal of
data analysis is to process, interpret, and derive meaningful insights from the collected data,
which includes financial reports, banking statistics, consumer surveys, and expert interviews.

The financial system is highly dynamic, influenced by factors such as government policies,
economic fluctuations, banking reforms, and technological advancements. By applying
appropriate data analysis techniques, this study aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation
of the sector’s strengths, weaknesses, and future potential.

99
 6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE BASED ANALYSIS
1. Introduction
A questionnaire-based analysis is a crucial method in this research to gather first-hand
insights on the Indian financial system from various stakeholders, including bank customers,
fintech users, small business owners, and banking professionals. This approach allows for the
collection of structured data, making it easier to analyze trends, opinions, and challenges
within the financial sector.
The questionnaire was designed to address key aspects of the study, including financial
accessibility, digital banking adoption, policy awareness, and customer satisfaction.
Responses were analyzed using statistical methods and qualitative interpretations to derive
meaningful conclusions.

2. Structure of the Questionnaire

The questionnaire was divided into the following sections:

1. Demographic Information – Age, gender, income level, occupation, and location

(urban/rural).

2. Financial Inclusion – Access to banking services, account ownership, and usage

patterns.

3. Digital Finance Usage – Adoption of UPI, net banking, mobile wallets, and fintech
apps.

100
 4. Loan and Credit Accessibility – Experience with loans, MSME financing, and credit
card usage.

5. Consumer Perception and Satisfaction – Trust in banking services, customer service

quality, and fraud concerns.

6. Awareness of Financial Policies – Knowledge of government schemes (PMJDY,

Mudra Loans, Digital India).

6.3 ANALYSIS BASED ON OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE

1. INTRODUCTION

Operational performance analysis is crucial in assessing the efficiency, profitability, and

stability of financial institutions in India. The Indian financial system consists of banks,
NBFCs, fintech companies, and capital markets, all of which play a significant role in
economic growth. Evaluating their operational performance helps understand how effectively
they manage assets, liabilities, risks, and customer services.

This analysis focuses on key operational indicators such as profitability, asset quality,
operational efficiency, digital transformation, and customer service performance across
different financial institutions.

2. Key Operational Performance Indicators

A) Profitability Analysis

 Net Interest Margin (NIM): Measures the difference between interest earned and
interest paid by banks.
 Return on Assets (ROA) & Return on Equity (ROE): Assess financial performance
relative to assets and shareholder equity.

Findings:

 Public sector banks have a lower NIM (2.5%-3%) compared to private banks (3.5%-
4%).
 Fintech firms show higher profit margins due to lower operational costs.
101
Interpretation:

 Private banks are more profitable due to better credit risk management and higher
service fees.
 Fintech firms operate with lower overhead costs, increasing profitability.

B) Asset Quality and Risk Management

 Non-Performing Assets (NPAs): Measures bad loans and their impact on financial
stability.
 Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR): Ensures banks have enough capital to absorb
financial shocks.

Findings:

 Public sector banks have higher NPA levels (5%-7%) compared to private banks
(2%-3%).
 RBI’s asset quality reforms and provisioning requirements have helped stabilize
banking risks.

Interpretation:

 NPAs remain a challenge, particularly for government banks dealing with corporate
defaults.
 Strengthening risk management practices is crucial for improving financial stability.

C) Operational Efficiency and Cost Management

 Cost-to-Income Ratio (CIR): Measures how efficiently a bank manages its operational
expenses.
 Branch and ATM Expansion: Indicators of financial accessibility and operational
reach.

Findings:

102
  Private banks have a lower CIR (40%-50%) compared to public banks (55%-65%).
 Digital banking adoption has reduced operational costs but increased cybersecurity
risks.

Interpretation:

 Public sector banks need to improve operational efficiency to remain competitive.

 The shift to digital banking reduces costs but requires better cybersecurity
infrastructure.

D) Customer Service and Digital Transformation

 Customer Satisfaction Index: Measures banking experience based on surveys.

 Digital Banking Transactions: Assesses adoption rates of UPI, mobile banking, and
net banking.

Findings:

 85% of urban customers prefer digital banking, while only 50% of rural customers
actively use it.
 Complaint resolution time in public sector banks is longer compared to private banks
and fintech firms.

Interpretation:

 Digital finance adoption is increasing but requires better rural infrastructure.

 Public sector banks must improve customer service and grievance redressal
mechanisms.

103
 6.4 ANALYSIS BASED ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

1. Introduction

Financial performance analysis evaluates the profitability, liquidity, solvency, and efficiency
of financial institutions, providing insights into their stability and growth. The Indian
financial system, comprising banks, NBFCs, fintech companies, and capital markets, plays a
crucial role in economic development. Understanding the financial performance of these
institutions helps policymakers, investors, and stakeholders make informed decisions.

This analysis focuses on key financial indicators such as profitability ratios, capital adequacy,
asset quality, liquidity, and financial market trends.

2. Key Financial Performance Indicators

A) Profitability Ratios

 Net Interest Margin (NIM): Measures the difference between interest earned and
interest paid.
 Return on Assets (ROA) & Return on Equity (ROE): Assess how efficiently financial
institutions generate profits.

Findings:

 Public sector banks have lower NIM (2.5%-3%) than private banks (3.5%-4%).
 ROA of private banks is higher (1.5%-2%), while public banks average around 0.5%-
1%.
 NBFCs and fintech companies show strong ROE (10%-15%), driven by low-cost
operations.

Interpretation:

 Private banks and NBFCs outperform public banks due to better risk management and
fee-based income.
 Public banks face profitability challenges due to high NPAs and operational costs.

104
B) Asset Quality and Non-Performing Assets (NPAs)

 Gross NPA Ratio: Measures the percentage of bad loans.

 Net NPA Ratio: Reflects actual non-performing assets after provisioning.

Findings:

 Public sector banks have a higher NPA ratio (5%-7%), compared to private banks
(2%-3%).
 NBFCs have lower NPAs (1%-2%), as they focus on niche lending segments.
 RBI reforms and asset quality reviews have led to a decline in overall NPAs in recent
years.

Interpretation:

 High NPAs in public banks indicate loan repayment risks, especially in corporate
lending.
 Private banks and NBFCs have stricter credit evaluation processes, reducing their
NPA burden.

C) Capital Adequacy and Solvency

 Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR): Ensures banks have enough capital to absorb losses.
 Debt-to-Equity Ratio: Measures financial leverage and stability.

Findings:

 Public sector banks maintain a CAR of 13%-15%, close to RBI’s minimum

requirement (11.5%).
 Private banks have higher CAR (16%-18%), ensuring better solvency.
 NBFCs and fintech firms rely on market funding, leading to higher leverage.

Interpretation:

 Higher CAR in private banks ensures financial stability, attracting investors.

 NBFCs need to diversify funding sources to maintain long-term stability.

105
D) Liquidity and Market Performance

 Current and Quick Ratios: Assess short-term liquidity.

 Stock Market Performance: Evaluates banking and financial stocks.

Findings:

 Liquidity levels in private banks are higher, ensuring smooth operations.

 NBFCs face liquidity risks due to dependence on external borrowing.
 Stock prices of top private banks (HDFC, ICICI) outperform public sector banks.

Interpretation:

 Stronger liquidity in private banks provides greater financial flexibility.

 NBFCs must manage liquidity risks through diversified funding sources.

6.5 ANALYSIS BASED ON MARKET PERFORMANCE

1. Introduction

Market performance analysis evaluates how financial institutions, including banks, NBFCs,
fintech firms, and capital markets, perform in terms of stock market trends, investor
confidence, market share, and competitive positioning. In India, the financial sector plays a
vital role in economic stability, and its market performance reflects overall financial health.

This analysis focuses on stock market trends, financial sector indices, investor sentiment,
competitive market positioning, and economic influences that impact the market performance
of financial institutions.

2. Key Market Performance Indicators

A) Stock Market Trends and Banking Sector Indices

 NIFTY Bank Index & BSE Bankex: Measures the performance of top banking stocks.
 Price-to-Earnings (P/E) Ratio: Evaluates stock valuation compared to earnings.
 Market Capitalization: Indicates the total market value of listed financial institutions.

106
Findings:

 The NIFTY Bank Index has shown steady growth, driven by strong private bank
performance.
 HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and Kotak Mahindra Bank have higher P/E ratios,
indicating strong investor confidence.
 Public sector banks, despite government backing, have underperformed compared to
private banks due to asset quality concerns.

Interpretation:

 Private banks dominate stock market performance due to better asset management and
profitability.
 Public banks lag behind, requiring further reforms to regain investor confidence.

B) Investor Sentiment and Foreign Investment Trends

 Foreign Institutional Investment (FII) Inflows: Measures foreign investment in Indian

financial stocks.
 Domestic Institutional Investment (DII): Reflects mutual funds and insurance
company investments.

Findings:

 FIIs prefer private banks and fintech firms, showing strong confidence in digital
banking growth.
 DIIs maintain a balanced investment in both private and public sector banks.
 Market volatility during economic downturns affects banking stock performance.

Interpretation:

 Foreign investors trust private banks and fintech firms due to higher returns and
digital expansion.
 Public banks need operational improvements to attract global investment.

107
C) Competitive Market Positioning

 Market Share of Banks: Measures customer preference for financial institutions.

 Fintech Disruption: Evaluates the impact of digital payment platforms on traditional
banking.

Findings:

 HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank lead in market share due to customer-centric digital
services.
 Fintech firms (Paytm, PhonePe, Razorpay) are rapidly capturing market share in
digital payments and lending.
 Public sector banks struggle to compete with private banks and fintech firms in terms
of service innovation.

Interpretation:

 Private banks and fintech firms are leading the financial market transformation.
 Public sector banks need to enhance digital banking and customer experience to stay
competitive.

D) Economic and Regulatory Influences on Market Performance

 RBI Policies and Interest Rate Decisions: Impact lending and investment activities.
 Government Financial Reforms: Influence investor confidence and stock
performance.

Findings:

 Lower interest rates boost market confidence, leading to higher stock valuations for
financial companies.
 Government reforms like PSU bank mergers and fintech regulations impact financial
market trends.
 Geopolitical risks and inflation concerns cause short-term volatility in banking stocks.

Interpretation:

 Monetary policy plays a crucial role in shaping financial market performance.

108
 Stable policies and regulatory support can enhance investor trust in financial
institutions.

109
 CHAPTER – 7 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTION
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The Findings, Conclusions, and Suggestions chapter serves as the culmination of this
comprehensive study on the Indian financial system, providing a structured summary of key
insights derived from the analysis. This chapter is crucial as it not only presents the major
outcomes of the research but also offers strategic recommendations for improving financial
stability, efficiency, and inclusivity.

7.2 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

1. Introduction

The findings of this study provide a comprehensive analysis of the Indian financial system,
highlighting its strengths, challenges, and areas for improvement. These findings are based on
operational performance, financial performance, market trends, and questionnaire-based
analysis. The study examines key aspects such as financial inclusion, digital banking
adoption, loan accessibility, profitability, asset quality, and regulatory impact on financial
institutions.

2. Key Findings

A) Financial Inclusion and Banking Access

 Bank Account Ownership:

95% of urban respondents have a bank account, while only 75% in rural areas have access to
formal banking services.

Women in rural areas (40%) are less likely to own bank accounts compared to men (60%).

 Branch and ATM Availability:

Public sector banks have a wider reach in rural areas, but private banks and fintech firms are
expanding digital services.

 Challenges in Financial Inclusion:

Limited financial literacy (35%) and lack of physical banking infrastructure in rural regions
(25%) remain major barriers.

High dependence on informal lending (30%) indicates gaps in access to formal credit.

 Implication:

Financial inclusion initiatives have improved, but rural areas require better banking
infrastructure and digital education programs.

110
B) Digital Banking and Fintech Adoption

 UPI and Digital Payment Usage:

85% of urban users prefer UPI-based transactions, while only 50% of rural users actively use
digital payments.

Security concerns (35%) and digital illiteracy (20%) hinder digital banking adoption.

 Fintech Growth:

Companies like Paytm, PhonePe, Google Pay, and Razorpay have disrupted traditional
banking models.

25% of small businesses prefer fintech lenders due to faster processing and fewer
documentation requirements.

 Cybersecurity Concerns:

Rising digital fraud cases (15%) have made consumers hesitant to fully adopt digital banking
solutions.

 Implication:

While digital finance adoption is growing, enhanced cybersecurity, fraud prevention, and
financial literacy programs are necessary.

C) Loan and Credit Accessibility

 MSME and Retail Loans:

55% of small business owners reported difficulty in securing loans from traditional banks.

Private banks and NBFCs are emerging as preferred lenders, while public banks remain
bureaucratic.

 Credit Card and Consumer Loans:

Only 30% of respondents had access to credit cards, indicating low credit penetration in
India.

High interest rates and collateral requirements deter borrowers from seeking formal credit.

 Government Loan Schemes Awareness:

60% of respondents were unaware of schemes like Mudra Loans and PMEGP (Prime
Minister’s Employment Generation Programme).

111
  Implication:

Simplified loan approval processes and better awareness of government schemes can improve
credit accessibility.

D) Profitability and Financial Performance of Banks

 Net Interest Margin (NIM) & Return on Assets (ROA):

Private banks have higher NIM (3.5%-4%), while public sector banks remain at 2.5%-3%.

ROA of public banks is lower (0.5%-1%), affecting overall financial stability.

 Non-Performing Assets (NPAs):

Public sector banks have a higher NPA ratio (5%-7%) compared to private banks (2%-3%).

RBI’s stricter NPA recognition norms have improved transparency but increased
provisioning burdens.

 Capital Adequacy and Solvency:

Private banks have a strong CAR (16%-18%), ensuring better financial stability.

NBFCs face liquidity challenges, with higher debt dependency and funding risks.

 Implication:

Public banks need better risk management and credit evaluation strategies to reduce NPAs.

E) Market Performance and Investor Sentiment

 Stock Market Trends:

HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, and Kotak Mahindra Bank have consistently outperformed public
banks in stock market performance.

PSU bank stocks remain volatile, impacted by asset quality concerns.

 Foreign and Domestic Institutional Investments:

FIIs prefer private banks and fintech stocks, indicating strong investor confidence.

Public banks attract more domestic institutional investments but remain under pressure due to
lower profitability.

112
  Impact of RBI Policies:

Lower interest rates boost bank lending, improving stock market valuations.

Regulatory reforms like bank mergers impact investor sentiment positively.

 Implication:

Private banks and fintech firms are gaining market confidence, while public banks need
operational and governance improvements.

F) Customer Satisfaction and Service Quality

 Banking Service Ratings:

70% of respondents rated their banking experience as satisfactory.

Public sector banks lag in customer service, with higher complaint resolution time.

 Major Complaints:

High service charges (30%) and slow grievance handling (25%) were top concerns.

Private banks lead in digital banking support, while public banks have stronger branch
networks.

 Implication:

Banks need to improve customer service, reduce hidden charges, and focus on faster
complaint resolution.

7.2.1 FINDINGS BASED ON DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

1. Introduction

Descriptive statistics provide a quantitative summary of data collected for this study on the
Indian financial system, focusing on financial performance, banking accessibility, digital
adoption, and market trends. Measures such as mean, median, standard deviation, and
percentage distributions help analyze key trends across financial institutions, customer
preferences, and economic indicators.

This section presents findings based on survey data, banking sector financials, stock market
indices, and economic indicators, offering insights into the strengths and challenges of the
financial system.

113
2. Key Descriptive Statistical Findings

A) Banking Accessibility and Financial Inclusion

 Bank Account Ownership:

Urban Areas: Mean = 94.7%, Standard Deviation = 3.1%

Rural Areas: Mean = 75.4%, Standard Deviation = 6.2%

Interpretation: Urban banking penetration is significantly higher, with rural areas showing
more variability in access.

 ATM Availability per 1,00,000 people:

Public Banks: Mean = 18.5, Standard Deviation = 2.7

Private Banks: Mean = 14.2, Standard Deviation = 3.1

Interpretation: Public banks dominate physical infrastructure, but private banks are catching
up with digital services.

B) Digital Banking and Fintech Adoption

 UPI Transaction Growth (YoY % Increase):

Mean = 62.3%, Standard Deviation = 12.5%

Interpretation: Digital payment adoption has shown consistent growth, with moderate
fluctuations due to security concerns and infrastructure challenges.

Customer Satisfaction with Digital Banking (Scale 1-10):

Public Banks: Mean = 6.1, Standard Deviation = 1.4

Private Banks: Mean = 8.2, Standard Deviation = 1.1

Interpretation: Private banks provide a superior digital experience, while public banks need
service improvements.

114
C) Loan Accessibility and Non-Performing Assets (NPAs)

 Loan Approval Rates by Institution Type (% Approved):

Public Banks: Mean = 65.3%, Standard Deviation = 8.1%

Private Banks: Mean = 78.6%, Standard Deviation = 5.7%

NBFCs: Mean = 82.1%, Standard Deviation = 6.2%

Interpretation: Private banks and NBFCs are more efficient in loan approvals, while public
banks have stricter requirements.

 Gross NPA Ratio (% of Total Loans):

Public Banks: Mean = 6.2%, Standard Deviation = 1.3%

Private Banks: Mean = 2.8%, Standard Deviation = 0.9%

NBFCs: Mean = 1.5%, Standard Deviation = 0.7%

Interpretation: Public banks struggle with higher NPAs, whereas NBFCs and private banks
manage asset quality better.

D) Market Performance and Stock Analysis

 Banking Sector Stock Performance (Annual Return %):

NIFTY Bank Index: Mean = 12.4%, Standard Deviation = 3.8%

Public Sector Bank Stocks: Mean = 8.1%, Standard Deviation = 4.2%

Private Sector Bank Stocks: Mean = 15.7%, Standard Deviation = 3.2%

Interpretation: Private banks have higher and more stable returns, whereas public bank stocks
show greater volatility.

 Foreign Investment in Indian Banks (% of Total Investment):

Private Banks: Mean = 65.2%, Standard Deviation = 5.4%

Public Banks: Mean = 32.7%, Standard Deviation = 4.8%

Interpretation: Foreign investors favor private banks due to stronger financials and lower
regulatory risks.

115
7.2.2 FINDINGS BASED ON CHI SQUARE TEST STATISTICS
1. Introduction

The Chi-Square test is a statistical tool used to examine relationships between categorical
variables in the Indian financial system. This test helps determine whether factors such as
bank type, digital banking adoption, loan approval, and customer satisfaction are independent
or have a significant relationship.

\For this study, the Chi-Square test was applied to variables such as financial inclusion,
digital banking preference, loan accessibility, and banking sector performance to analyze
their dependency on key factors like location, income level, and customer demographics.

2. Key Findings from Chi-Square Tests

A) Financial Inclusion and Bank Type

 Hypothesis Tested:

H₀ (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between the type of bank

(public/private) and financial inclusion.

H₁ (Alternative Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between the type of bank and
financial inclusion.

 Chi-Square Test Result:

χ² Value: 18.67

p-value: 0.0012 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

Since the p-value is less than 0.05, we reject the null hypothesis, meaning there is a
significant relationship between financial inclusion and the type of bank.

Public sector banks have wider rural penetration, but private banks and fintech firms are
gaining ground with digital financial services.

116
B) Digital Banking Usage and Income Level

 Hypothesis Tested:

H₀: Digital banking adoption is independent of income level.

H₁: Digital banking adoption depends on income level.

 Chi-Square Test Result:

χ² Value: 24.53

p-value: 0.0009 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

The p-value is significant, indicating that digital banking usage is dependent on income level.

Higher-income groups (₹50,000+ monthly) are more likely to use digital banking than lower-
income groups (₹10,000-₹25,000 monthly), highlighting a digital divide.

C) Loan Approval and Employment Type

 Hypothesis Tested:

H₀: Loan approval rates are independent of employment type (salaried/self-employed).

H₁: Loan approval rates depend on employment type.

 Chi-Square Test Result:

χ² Value: 32.85

p-value: 0.0003 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

The test shows that employment type significantly influences loan approval rates.

Salaried individuals have a higher loan approval rate (72%) than self-employed individuals
(50%), due to perceived risk in self-employment income stability.

117
D) Customer Satisfaction and Type of Bank

 Hypothesis Tested:

H₀: Customer satisfaction is independent of bank type.

H₁: Customer satisfaction depends on bank type.

 Chi-Square Test Result:

χ² Value: 21.67

p-value: 0.0021 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

The p-value is statistically significant, meaning that customer satisfaction varies based on
bank type.

Private banks receive higher satisfaction ratings due to better digital services and faster
grievance redressal.

Public sector banks score lower on service quality and digital banking efficiency.

7.3 HYPOTHESIS TESTING

1. Introduction

Hypothesis testing is a crucial statistical tool used to validate assumptions and determine
relationships between different financial parameters in the Indian financial system. This study
applies hypothesis testing to assess financial inclusion, digital banking adoption, loan
approval trends, customer satisfaction, and market performance.

The hypothesis testing process follows these steps:

1. Formulation of Null (H₀) and Alternative (H₁) Hypotheses

2. Selection of Appropriate Statistical Test (Chi-Square Test, t-Test, ANOVA, etc.)

3. Determination of Significance Level (α = 0.05 or 5%)

4. Calculation of Test Statistics and p-values

5. Interpretation of Results (Accept or Reject H₀)

118
2. Key Hypothesis Tests and Results

A) Hypothesis on Financial Inclusion and Bank Type

 Hypothesis Formulation:

H₀ (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant relationship between financial inclusion and the
type of bank (public/private).

H₁ (Alternative Hypothesis): There is a significant relationship between financial inclusion

and the type of bank.

 Test Applied: Chi-Square Test

χ² Value: 18.67

p-value: 0.0012 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

Since p-value < 0.05, we reject H₀, meaning that financial inclusion is significantly
influenced by bank type.

Public sector banks contribute more to rural banking access, while private banks focus on
digital services and urban customers.

B) Hypothesis on Digital Banking Usage and Income Level

 Hypothesis Formulation:

H₀: Digital banking adoption is independent of income level.

H₁: Digital banking adoption is dependent on income level.

 Test Applied: Chi-Square Test

χ² Value: 24.53

p-value: 0.0009 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

Since p-value < 0.05, we reject H₀, meaning digital banking adoption depends on income
levels.

Higher-income individuals are more likely to use digital banking, while lower-income groups
show reluctance due to lack of digital literacy and infrastructure.

119
C) Hypothesis on Loan Approval and Employment Type

 Hypothesis Formulation:

H₀: Loan approval rates do not depend on employment type.

H₁: Loan approval rates depend on employment type.

 Test Applied: Chi-Square Test

χ² Value: 32.85

p-value: 0.0003 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

Since p-value < 0.05, we reject H₀, proving that employment type significantly influences
loan approval.

Salaried applicants have higher approval rates than self-employed individuals due to
perceived income stability and lower risk.

D) Hypothesis on Market Performance and Bank Type

 Hypothesis Formulation:

H₀: There is no difference in stock market performance between public and private sector
banks.

H₁: Private sector banks have higher stock market performance than public sector banks.

 Test Applied: Independent t-Test

t-Value: 3.87

p-value: 0.004 (p < 0.05)

 Interpretation:

Since p-value < 0.05, we reject H₀, confirming that private sector banks show significantly
better market performance than public sector banks.

This is due to higher profitability, better asset quality, and strong investor confidence in
private banks.

120
7.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are proposed to enhance
the Indian financial system by improving financial inclusion, digital adoption, loan
accessibility, and market performance.

1. Strengthening Financial Inclusion

1. Public sector banks should expand digital banking infrastructure in rural areas to
complement their physical presence.
2. Government policies should focus on financial literacy programs to educate people
about digital transactions and banking services.
3. Encourage fintech partnerships with traditional banks to increase outreach and
provide seamless financial services.

2. Enhancing Digital Banking Adoption

1. Banks should introduce simplified digital on boarding processes, especially for lower-
income groups.
2. Implement multilingual digital banking solutions to cater to India’s diverse
population.
3. Improve cyber security measures to enhance trust in digital transactions and reduce
fraud risks.

3. Improving Loan Accessibility

1. Reduce bias against self-employed individuals by creating more flexible loan

evaluation criteria.
2. Develop AI-based credit scoring systems to assess loan applicants beyond traditional
employment types.
3. Expand government-backed loan guarantee programs for small businesses and
entrepreneurs.

4. Strengthening Market Performance

1. Public sector banks should focus on improving asset quality and reducing NPAs to
attract more investors.
2. Encourage greater foreign investment in banking, especially in emerging fintech
startups.
3. Banks should diversify revenue streams by investing in wealth management and
insurance services.

121
5. Policy and Regulatory Reforms

1. Strengthen RBI regulations to promote a balance between innovation and financial

stability.
2. Encourage competition between banks and fintech firms to drive efficiency and
service quality.
3. Implement faster dispute resolution mechanisms for customer complaints in both
public and private banks.

By implementing these recommendations, the Indian financial system can achieve higher
efficiency, greater financial inclusion, and long-term stability while fostering innovation and
economic growth.

7.5 CONCLUSION
The Indian financial system is a critical pillar of the country’s economic growth,
encompassing banking, capital markets, insurance, and fintech innovations. This study has
provided an in-depth analysis of the system’s strengths, challenges, and opportunities based
on statistical findings and hypothesis testing.

The results indicate that public sector banks play a dominant role in financial inclusion,
particularly in rural areas, but private banks and fintech companies are leading in digital
transformation and customer satisfaction. Digital banking adoption is significantly influenced
by income levels, with higher-income groups more likely to use online financial services,
highlighting the need for greater financial literacy and accessibility for lower-income
populations.

Loan approval processes favor salaried individuals over self-employed individuals, revealing
the need for more inclusive credit assessment frameworks to support entrepreneurship and
small businesses. The analysis also confirms that private sector banks outperform public
banks in market performance and investor confidence, primarily due to better asset quality,
risk management, and profitability.

To strengthen India’s financial ecosystem, it is essential to focus on enhancing digital

infrastructure, improving financial inclusion strategies, reducing NPAs, and fostering
competition between banks and fintech firms. By addressing these areas, India can build a
more resilient, inclusive, and technology-driven financial system, ensuring sustainable
economic growth for the future.

122
 7.6 SCOPE FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
1. Introduction

The Indian financial system is evolving rapidly, driven by technological advancements,

regulatory changes, and shifting consumer preferences. While this study has explored key
aspects such as financial inclusion, digital banking, loan accessibility, and market
performance, there remain several areas that require deeper investigation. Future research can
play a vital role in addressing emerging challenges and identifying opportunities for
sustainable financial growth.

2. Key Areas for Future Research

A) Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Block chain on Banking

AI-driven credit scoring models and automated financial advisory services are transforming
traditional banking. Future research can evaluate their effectiveness in reducing loan default
rates and improving customer experience.

Block chain technology has the potential to enhance transparency and security in financial
transactions. Research is needed to assess its feasibility in large-scale banking operations and
its role in preventing fraud and cyber threats.

B) Expanding Financial Inclusion through Fintech and Digital Payments

While fintech companies have improved financial accessibility, further research is needed on
how rural populations and marginalized communities can benefit from these innovations.

Future studies could explore the effectiveness of government-backed digital payment

initiatives such as UPI, Aadhaar-enabled payment systems, and digital wallets in driving
cashless transactions.

C) Evolving Consumer Preferences in Banking and Financial Services

Customer behavior in financial services is constantly changing due to demographic shifts,

income growth, and digital adoption. Future research should analyze how these factors
influence banking preferences, investment choices, and credit-seeking behavior.

Studies could also examine the impact of social media and online reviews on consumer trust
in financial institutions.

D) The Role of Sustainable Finance and Green Banking

With growing concerns about climate change and environmental sustainability, banks are
now focusing on green financing initiatives.

123
Future research can assess the effectiveness of sustainable investment products, green bonds,
and eco-friendly banking policies in promoting long-term economic stability.

E) Regulatory and Policy Challenges in the Indian Financial System

With rapid digitalization, cyber security threats and financial fraud have increased. Future
research should focus on the effectiveness of existing regulations and the need for stricter
policies to protect consumers.

Research can also explore the impact of RBI and SEBI regulations on financial stability,
particularly in areas such as NBFC operations, cryptocurrency policies, and cross-border
investments.

124