How fit-and-proper is Sachin Bansal to run a bank?

The billionaire co-founder of Flipkart’s quest for a full banking licence is one paper away from fruition. What are his chances?

22 July, 202014 min
0
How fit-and-proper is Sachin Bansal to run a bank?

Why read this story?

Editor's note: In September 2019, the co-founder of India’s star e-commerce, Sachin Bansal, was not the first suitor of an insurance business that was on the block. Beleaguered home finance company DHFL’s parent WGC was selling its stake in its general insurance unit to bring down its liabilities and wanted to exit quickly. Another tech entrepreneur, Paytm’s Vijay Shekhar Sharma, was already at the door offering more money, but wouldn’t sign the dotted line until December. But WGC could not wait and decided to exclusively deal with Bansal as he seemed a surer suitor. The due diligence prolonged and it was not until January that the deal was done for Rs 220 crore (most papers reported the deal was worth only Rs 100 crore). At the last minute, there was a serious hitch. Authorities at the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India realized that Bansal’s company Navi Technologies could not be cleared “fit-and-proper” as its earlier application to be a non-banking financial company, or NBFC, was pending before the Reserve Bank of India. IRDA did not want to pre-empt the RBI. …

You may also like

Business
Story image

Yes Bank’s succession problem is a board problem

As Prashant Kumar’s term runs out, boardroom fault lines have left the lender with no clarity on its next CEO—spooking investors and drawing the RBI’s ire.

Internet
Story image

Why SoftBank has shunned India

For one of the world’s largest and shrewdest investors to entirely skip putting money in the country is a sign of how quickly the nature of the Indian startup ecosystem has changed.

Business
Story image

Why IndusInd Bank promoter Ashok Hinduja was never really in the dark

As the private lender reeled from serial scandals, Hinduja insisted he was merely a shareholder. Board-level links, conflicts of interest and regulatory blind spots suggest otherwise.