Sai Urja Indo Ventures Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does: runs and maintains equipment inside other companies' plants, chiefly coal-fired power stations: electrical, control and instrumentation and mechanical maintenance, operation of coal handling plants, merry-go-round rail systems and boiler-turbine-generator units, plus housekeeping, overhauls and manpower supply (RHP p.195, RHP p.196, RHP p.197).

Who pays it: 7 clients in FY26, of whom one was 74.77% of revenue; public sector undertakings were 92.27% of FY26 revenue and power generation 95.06% (RHP p.199, RHP p.36, RHP p.39). Named clients include Adani Infrastructure Management Services Limited, GMR Warora Energy Limited and Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (RHP p.195).

Why it is raising money: ₹800.00 lakh for working capital and ₹660.00 lakh to repay borrowings, with general corporate purposes left blank; ₹379.20 lakh of shares at face value is being sold by the promoters, who keep that money (RHP p.122, RHP p.123).

How fast it has grown: revenue from ₹4,561.64 lakh in FY24 to ₹8,510.97 lakh in FY26, 36.59% a year as the company computes it, and profit after tax from ₹137.19 lakh to ₹423.57 lakh, about 75.7% a year (RHP p.198, our arithmetic, RHP p.84).

The one thing to understand: one client was 74.77% of FY26 revenue, ₹6,363.50 lakh, up from 49.99% in FY24 (RHP p.35). Employee benefit expenses were ₹7,430.51 lakh of ₹8,510.97 lakh of revenue, 87.3%, so this is a labour contract business with a very thin cost cushion (our arithmetic, RHP p.84).

02The business, in plain words

Sai Urja wins tenders from power stations and other plants to operate or maintain parts of them, puts its own employees on site, and bills monthly against work verified by the client (RHP p.195, RHP p.126). Contracts run from short bills of quantity to three-year maintenance contracts; at 15 June 2026 there were 11 annual, 18 biennial and 7 triennial contracts (RHP p.195, RHP p.199).

A power station needs its electrical, instrumentation or coal handling systems run and maintained → tenders the work → Sai Urja deploys its own staff on the client's site for one to three years → Sai Urja keeps what is left after wages, site costs and interest.

The company was incorporated in May 2012 at Chandrapur, Maharashtra, and converted to a public limited company in February 2025 (RHP p.225). Over the last three years it has served 21 locations in 9 states, in coal-based power plants, steel plants and fertiliser plants (RHP p.195). It deployed 2,058 people in FY26, down from 2,469 in FY25, and 1,019 left during FY26 (RHP p.199, RHP p.37). It has two associate partnership firms, Aspire Associates and Shikhar Associates, in similar work (RHP p.88, RHP p.227).

Earnings equation: Profit ≈ contract billing − wages of deployed staff − site and travel costs − interest. In FY26 employee benefit expenses were ₹7,430.51 lakh, cost of materials ₹228.25 lakh and other expenses ₹200.83 lakh against revenue of ₹8,510.97 lakh (RHP p.84).

03Where the money comes from

Source: RHP p.199.

By end market, FY26 revenue was power generation 95.06%, agrochemicals 2.47% and iron and steel 2.40% (RHP p.39). By client type, public sector undertakings were 92.27%, against 81.28% in FY24 (RHP p.36). The company served 15 plant locations in FY26, of 28,220 MW of installed capacity, and executed 36 projects (RHP p.199).

Source: RHP p.199, RHP p.35. Revenue depends on very few clients: there were 7 in FY26, 6 in FY25 and 9 in FY24, and the largest alone was ₹6,363.50 lakh of FY26 revenue (RHP p.199, RHP p.35). The prospectus does not name the largest client. Purchases are not concentrated: the largest supplier was 7.78% of FY26 purchases (RHP p.199).

04The growth record

Source: RHP p.198, RHP p.84, RHP p.85.

Net worth was ₹471.75 lakh, ₹776.44 lakh and ₹1,219.74 lakh; total borrowings were ₹214.64 lakh, ₹534.83 lakh and ₹717.97 lakh; return on net worth was 34.37%, 50.27% and 42.44%, and return on capital employed 52.51%, 65.43% and 50.66% (RHP p.82, RHP p.198). The company states revenue CAGR of 36.59% and EBITDA CAGR of 49.20% from FY24 to FY26 (RHP p.198). Our arithmetic: profit grew about 75.7% a year over the same period; EBITDA margin rose 124 basis points and PAT margin 197 basis points (RHP p.198).

05What the growth is made of

More work at the same plants, and a new line. Read from the filing: revenue rose ₹3,949.33 lakh from FY24 to FY26 while the number of plant locations fell from 17 to 15 and the number of clients from 9 to 7, so average realisation per plant went from ₹268.21 lakh to ₹566.99 lakh (our arithmetic, RHP p.199). Of the increase, maintenance contributed ₹1,834.56 lakh, operations ₹1,179.89 lakh and the other segment ₹934.89 lakh; the operations segment, which was ₹158.02 lakh in FY24, is now ₹1,337.91 lakh (our arithmetic, RHP p.199).

People deployed went from 1,611 in FY24 to 2,469 in FY25 and 2,058 in FY26, so revenue per person deployed rose from ₹2.83 lakh to ₹4.14 lakh over the two years (our arithmetic, RHP p.199). The prospectus does not disclose billing rates or the margin by contract type, so the split between rate and headcount cannot be taken further. Contracts lengthened: biennial contracts went from 9 in FY24 to 18 in FY26 and annual contracts from 23 to 11 (RHP p.199).

06Earnings quality

Two items need explaining. First, cash: over three years the company earned ₹874.50 lakh of profit and generated ₹30.20 lakh from operations, because other financial assets rose sharply, by ₹342.91 lakh in FY26 alone, and other current liabilities fell by ₹326.66 lakh in FY26 after rising in FY25 (our arithmetic, RHP p.85).

The other financial assets are security deposits and retention money that clients hold for the contract period: short-term security deposits went from ₹48.41 lakh in FY24 to ₹238.24 lakh in FY26, and retention money receivable from ₹37.93 lakh to ₹151.10 lakh (RHP p.127). Second, the year-end liability: the company says it used its bank overdraft to pay labour wage liabilities at the FY26 year end, which is why other current liabilities fell (RHP p.128).

07The balance sheet

At March 2026 borrowings were ₹717.97 lakh: ₹126.96 lakh non-current and ₹591.01 lakh current, against ₹214.64 lakh at March 2024 (RHP p.82). The auditor's statement puts total borrowing at ₹717.76 lakh, all with ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank: ₹608.62 lakh secured, including a ₹500.00 lakh overdraft limit drawn to ₹407.69 lakh, and ₹109.14 lakh unsecured business loans at 13.75% and 14.00% (RHP p.308). The secured facilities are against immovable property at Chandrapur and a fixed deposit, and carry personal guarantees from Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal and Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal (RHP p.309). Debt to equity was 0.59 times in FY26 (RHP p.198).

Cash and cash equivalents were ₹34.75 lakh, of which ₹34.07 lakh was cash on hand (RHP p.86). Trade receivables were ₹1,051.50 lakh and other financial assets ₹1,059.62 lakh across current and non-current (RHP p.82). Contingent liabilities were ₹111.29 lakh at March 2026, being ₹102.16 lakh of guarantees and ₹9.13 lakh of other money, against nil in both earlier years; there were no capital commitments (RHP p.87).

After the offer: at the upper band the fresh issue brings in ₹2,066.54 lakh before expenses, against net worth of ₹1,219.74 lakh at March 2026, and ₹660.00 lakh of it repays debt of ₹755.88 lakh outstanding at 30 June 2026 (our arithmetic, RHP p.82, RHP p.129, RHP p.130).

08What the money is for

Source: RHP p.122; percentages our arithmetic on a fresh issue of ₹2,066.54 lakh at ₹113.

The working capital money is to bridge the gap between wages, settled within about 30 days, and client payments, realised in about 50 to 60 days; the company puts net working capital at ₹1,165.97 lakh at March 2026 and ₹1,787.76 lakh estimated for March 2027 (RHP p.124, RHP p.125).

The debt to be repaid is ₹660.00 lakh of the ₹755.88 lakh outstanding at 30 June 2026 across nine ICICI Bank facilities, and no-objection certificates have been taken from the lenders (RHP p.129, RHP p.130). Everything is scheduled for FY 2026-27 (RHP p.122).

Our arithmetic: at the upper band ₹606.54 lakh of the fresh issue is not allotted to a named object and covers general corporate purposes and offer expenses, both left blank (RHP p.122, RHP p.131).

Into the business ₹2,066.54 lakh at the upper band, from 18,28,800 new shares (our arithmetic, RHP p.105). To selling shareholders ₹428.50 lakh at the upper band, from 3,79,200 shares sold by the two promoters, 17.2% of the offer (our arithmetic, RHP p.106).

09Who is selling

Source: RHP p.106, RHP p.117; percentages our arithmetic. Both consents are dated 20 July 2026 (RHP p.79). At the upper band the two would receive ₹214.25 lakh each before tax and expenses (our arithmetic, RHP p.106).

Separately, on 8 and 9 September 2026, a week before the prospectus was dated, Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal transferred 3,84,000 shares, 6.61% of the capital, at ₹113 a share to eight buyers: KIFS Finstock Limited took 1,35,000, Ansul Jiteshkumar Patel 66,000, Narender Sharma 61,000, Chaitanya Prasad Sahoo 49,000, Dhawal Gaurang Vasavada 44,300, Amit Kumar Kishorpuria 10,700, Dinesh Kumar 9,000 and Nitin Chittananda Rao 9,000 (RHP p.111). That is ₹433.92 lakh, at exactly the cap price of this offer (our arithmetic, RHP p.111).

10Promoters

The promoters are Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal, aged 44, founder, chairman and managing director since 10 February 2025, a mechanical engineering graduate with over 13 years in the field; and Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal, aged 72, founder and executive director since 10 February 2025, an arts graduate with over 13 years of experience (RHP p.249).

The prospectus states both are the original promoters and that there has been no change in control in the last five years (RHP p.250). Chetan Arun Mittal is a non-executive director and Abhai Kumar Mittal is chief financial officer from 10 February 2025; the prospectus classes both as related parties but does not state a family relationship (RHP p.93, RHP p.88).

The two promoters hold 53,94,626 shares, 92.85% of the capital before the offer, and the promoter and promoter group category 53,95,788 shares, 92.87% (our arithmetic, RHP p.117, RHP p.115).

Promoter economics: both subscribed to the memorandum in 2012 at ₹10 a share, Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal for 5,500 shares and Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal for 4,500 (RHP p.108). On 10 March 2025 the company allotted 58,00,000 bonus shares, 580 for every 1 held, out of free reserves, of which 31,90,000 went to Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal and 25,78,680 to Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal (RHP p.108).

Before that, on 18 September 2024, Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal transferred 54 shares at ₹6,171 each to five people, including 50 to Chetan Arun Mittal, who then received bonus shares on them (RHP p.108, RHP p.111). No promoter shares are pledged (RHP p.110). Promoter remuneration was ₹25.20 lakh in FY24 and ₹27.60 lakh in FY26 between the two (our arithmetic, RHP p.88).

Litigation touching the promoters: Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal has been added as a party, in the capacity of managing director, to two of the three criminal complaints filed against the company by labour enforcement officers under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act (RHP p.334). An income tax demand of ₹0.98 lakh for assessment year 2025-26 is shown on the portal against Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal, for which a rectification request has been filed (RHP p.335).

11Who already owns it

Before the offer there are 58,10,000 shares held by 15 shareholders: 4 in the promoter and promoter group category with 92.87% and 11 in the public category with 7.13% (RHP p.115, RHP p.116, RHP p.110). After the offer there will be up to 76,38,800 shares, and the promoters' 50,15,426 would be about 65.7% (our arithmetic, RHP p.79, RHP p.117).

The holders of 1% or more are Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal 48.39%, Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal 44.46%, KIFS Finstock Limited 2.32%, Ansul Jiteshkumar Patel 1.14% and Narender Sharma 1.05% (RHP p.117). Ten days before the prospectus, and one year before it, the only 1% holders were the two promoters, with 99.46% between them (RHP p.117). Two years before, the two held 10,000 shares between them, the whole capital before the bonus (RHP p.117). The securities premium account is nil: every share has been issued at face value or as a bonus (RHP p.105, RHP p.108).

12What changed just before the IPO

• The company converted from private to public and was renamed, with a fresh certificate of incorporation dated 6 February 2025 (RHP p.225).
• Authorised capital was raised from ₹25 lakh to ₹10 crore on 14 February 2025 and to ₹11 crore on 28 April 2025 (RHP p.107).
• A bonus issue of 58,00,000 shares, 580 for every 1 held, was allotted on 10 March 2025, taking the capital from 10,000 shares to 58,10,000 (RHP p.108).
• Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal became chairman and managing director and Santosh Ajay Kumar Mittal an executive director, both from 10 February 2025 (RHP p.249).
• A chief financial officer was appointed on 10 February 2025 and a company secretary on 17 March 2025; two independent directors joined the board (RHP p.88, RHP p.93).
• The statutory auditor changed: M/s Zanzari Rameshkumar & Co. resigned on 20 June 2024 citing preoccupation with other assignments, and M/s Pavan Khabiya & Co. was appointed on 21 June 2024 to fill the casual vacancy (RHP p.100, RHP p.101).
• The largest client went from 49.99% of revenue in FY24 to 74.77% in FY26, while the client count fell from 9 to 7 (RHP p.199).
• Borrowings rose from ₹214.64 lakh at March 2024 to ₹717.97 lakh at March 2026 (RHP p.82).
• On 8 and 9 September 2026 a promoter sold 3,84,000 shares, 6.61% of the capital, at ₹113 a share to eight buyers (RHP p.111).
• The prospectus records ₹52,800 of late-filing penalties across nine forms filed late with the Registrar of Companies (RHP p.56).

13Capacity and expansion

The company manufactures nothing, so it has no installed capacity. Its capacity is people and contracts.

Source: RHP p.199. At 15 June 2026 the order book was ₹15,967.04 lakh across 21 contracts, of which ₹6,265.20 lakh had been invoiced and ₹9,701.84 lakh was yet to be executed; four contracts worth ₹2,536.73 lakh had not started (RHP p.40, RHP p.41). The prospectus states that orders in the book may be delayed, modified or cancelled and that future earnings may differ from the amount in it (RHP p.41). None of the offer proceeds funds capacity; the money goes to working capital and debt (RHP p.122).

14Market size and industry structure

As claimed: the industry chapter draws on a report titled "Industry Research, Power Operation and Maintenance Industry" dated 3 July 2026, prepared by B2K Analytics Private Limited and commissioned and paid for by the company (RHP p.6).

It puts the global operations and maintenance market at about USD 721.12 billion in 2025, reaching about USD 972.17 billion by 2034 at 3.37% a year, and says the Indian market grew at 4% a year over the last five years and is estimated to reach USD 34.7 billion by 2030 (RHP p.172). The report lists ten players in Indian power operations and maintenance, including the company itself and Power Mech Projects Limited (RHP p.173).

The part that is addressable: operations and maintenance contracts at coal-based power plants, steel plants and fertiliser plants in India, which is where all of the company's revenue comes from (RHP p.195, RHP p.39).

What the company is today: 15 plant locations, 36 projects, 2,058 people deployed and ₹8,510.97 lakh of FY26 revenue (RHP p.199). The commissioned report sizes the market in dollars for the whole of operations and maintenance across sectors, not for the power segment in India, so the company's share of its own market cannot be worked out from the filing.

The prospectus states that industry information in it has been derived from a report commissioned by the company, and that it has not independently verified that information (RHP p.63).

15Competitive position

The prospectus names no competitor in its competition discussion beyond the peer table and the commissioned report's list of ten Indian power operations and maintenance players, which includes Power Mech Projects Limited, ADV Powercon Pvt. Ltd and SKV Energy Services Pvt. Ltd (RHP p.173). It says the company faces competition from both organised and unorganised domestic players (RHP p.62) and that operations and maintenance contracts are also supplied by EPC companies, which makes pure-play operators fewer (RHP p.185).

The reasons the prospectus gives for clients awarding it work are its range of services across electrical, instrumentation, mechanical and operations, an ISO 45001:2018 certification obtained in 2024, and a record at large plants, including control and instrumentation at a 4,760 MW station and another of 3,000 MW (RHP p.200, RHP p.227, RHP p.195). Against that, the work comes through tenders with no guarantee of renewal, the registered and corporate offices are leased, the contracts carry liquidated damages clauses, and the company notes that in this trade employees are commonly taken over from the previous contractor at the start of a project (RHP p.50, RHP p.42, RHP p.37).

16Peers the company named

Peer named in the offer document: Lakshya Powertech Limited (RHP p.138).

Source: RHP p.138; the peer's price is the NSE close of 24 June 2026. The prospectus states there is only one comparable listed peer and gives the industry composite P/E as 11.27, the same figure (RHP p.137).

Lakshya Powertech's revenue is about 2.1 times Sai Urja's and its book value per share about 4.8 times, while Sai Urja's stated return on net worth is more than four times the peer's, on a net worth of ₹1,219.74 lakh (our arithmetic, RHP p.138, RHP p.82).

The prospectus also warns that the offer price, the market capitalisation to revenue multiple and the price to earnings ratio may not be indicative of the market price after listing (RHP p.66).

17Valuation at the issue price

At the upper band of ₹113, with the full 18,28,800 new shares added to 58,10,000 existing shares (our arithmetic, RHP p.105):

Source: RHP p.105, RHP p.137, RHP p.84. At the lower band of ₹107 the market capitalisation is ₹8,173.52 lakh and the P/E on FY26 profit 19.3 times (our arithmetic, RHP p.105). Enterprise value, adding March 2026 borrowings of ₹717.97 lakh and deducting cash of ₹34.75 lakh but not the offer proceeds, is ₹9,315.06 lakh, 14.3 times FY26 EBITDA of ₹651.38 lakh (our arithmetic, RHP p.82, RHP p.198). After the offer, book value including the fresh-issue proceeds would be about ₹3,286.28 lakh, and the market capitalisation at the upper band 2.6 times that (our arithmetic, RHP p.82).

The one peer the prospectus names traded at 11.27 times earnings on 24 June 2026, which the prospectus also gives as the industry composite (RHP p.137). At the upper band the offer is priced at 20.4 times FY26 profit on the enlarged share count, about 81% above that figure, and at 15.5 times on the prospectus's own pre-offer EPS basis (our arithmetic, RHP p.137, RHP p.138). The upper band is the same ₹113 at which a promoter sold 3,84,000 shares on 8 and 9 September 2026 (RHP p.111).

18Risks, in plain words

One client: the largest client was 74.77% of FY26 revenue, ₹6,363.50 lakh, against 49.99% in FY24 (RHP p.35) → losing or being cut back by that client would take most of the revenue, and there are only seven clients in total → the top five were 95.46% (RHP p.199, RHP p.35).

Public sector dependence: 92.27% of FY26 revenue came from contracts awarded by public sector undertakings (RHP p.36) → the work is tendered, and there is no assurance that contracts will be re-awarded → order book yet to be executed was ₹9,701.84 lakh at 15 June 2026 (RHP p.40).

Labour law proceedings: three criminal complaints by labour enforcement officers under the Contract Labour Act are pending against the company at Sundargarh, Mouda and Solapur, and Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal is a party to two of them (RHP p.333, RHP p.334) → the company is a contractor under that Act at every site it works on → the complaints concern sites with 201 and 60 workers on NTPC contracts (RHP p.333).

Labour costs and attrition: employee benefit expenses were ₹7,430.51 lakh, 87.3% of FY26 revenue (our arithmetic, RHP p.84) → a wage increase the contract does not pass through goes straight to profit → 1,019 of 2,058 people deployed left during FY26, and the prospectus records work stoppages exceeding 30 days in some cases (RHP p.37).

Cash: operating cash flow was negative ₹210.03 lakh in FY25 and negative ₹94.86 lakh in FY26 while profit rose (RHP p.85) → growth has been funded by borrowing, which went from ₹214.64 lakh to ₹717.97 lakh over two years → security deposits and retention money held by clients rose from ₹86.34 lakh to ₹389.34 lakh over the same period (our arithmetic, RHP p.82, RHP p.127).

Contract terms: contracts carry liquidated damages clauses, and 2% to 5% of every monthly invoice is retained by the client (RHP p.42, RHP p.127) → a delay or a disputed milestone reduces the amount collected → retention money receivable was ₹151.10 lakh at March 2026 (RHP p.127).

Filings: the prospectus records nine forms filed late with the Registrar of Companies, with ₹52,800 of penalties, and says no show-cause notice has been issued (RHP p.56) → further lapses could attract action → the company also records challenges in meeting deadlines for statutory returns (RHP p.45).

Offer-specific: the price band, bid lot, offer amount, general corporate purposes and offer expenses are all left blank in the prospectus (RHP p.122, RHP p.131), and ₹428.50 lakh of the offer at the upper band goes to the two promoters rather than the company (our arithmetic, RHP p.106).

19Litigation and regulatory matters

The company has no direct or indirect tax proceedings of its own, no disciplinary action by SEBI or the exchanges in the last five financial years, and no subsidiary or group company (RHP p.335, RHP p.332). At March 2026 trade payables were ₹75.22 lakh across 62 creditors, of which 13 micro, small and medium enterprises were owed ₹32.61 lakh (RHP p.336).

20Related-party transactions

Source: RHP p.88, RHP p.89, RHP p.90, RHP p.91. Our arithmetic: related-party transactions other than loan movements were about ₹207.68 lakh in FY26, of which ₹150.26 lakh is reimbursement of expenses to Shikhar Associates, an associate partnership firm (RHP p.89, RHP p.91).

What appeared and disappeared: reimbursements to Shikhar Associates went from ₹0.48 lakh in FY24 to ₹150.26 lakh in FY26 (RHP p.89); AM Power Solutions, an enterprise owned or influenced by relatives of the managing director, took and repaid ₹82.50 lakh of loans in FY25 and took ₹235.43 lakh of advances in FY24, with ₹268.14 lakh repaid in that year, and had no transactions in FY26 (RHP p.89, RHP p.90); sitting fees to Chetan Arun Mittal and two independent directors began in FY25 and rose to ₹4.20 lakh in FY26 (RHP p.91); and a property advance of ₹49.99 lakh given to Harsh Ajaykumar Mittal was received back in FY25 (RHP p.89).

21What the offer document does not say

The clients are not named in the concentration tables, so the client that is 74.77% of revenue is not identified there, although three clients are named in the business chapter. Billing rates per person, and margin by contract or by segment, are not disclosed, so the rise in revenue per person deployed cannot be split between rate and mix. The renewal record on expiring contracts is not disclosed.

The amounts claimed, if any, in the three labour law complaints are not quantified. The commissioned industry report sizes global and Indian operations and maintenance across all sectors but not power operations and maintenance in India, so the company's share of its market is not derivable. The price band, bid lot, offer amount, the sum for general corporate purposes and the offer expenses are left blank in the prospectus.

22Five questions for management

1. Which client is the 74.77% of FY26 revenue, when does that contract expire, and what is the renewal record on contracts of that size?
2. What is the margin on maintenance, operations and the other segment separately, and how much of the increase in revenue per person deployed from ₹2.83 lakh to ₹4.14 lakh was rate rather than mix?
3. What are the ₹150.26 lakh of expenses reimbursed to Shikhar Associates in FY26, and how are they charged?
4. What outcome and penalty is expected in each of the three Contract Labour Act complaints, and what has changed at the sites concerned?
5. Why did operating cash flow stay negative in FY26 despite profit of ₹423.57 lakh, and how much of the ₹800.00 lakh of working capital money is going into security deposits and retention money rather than payroll?

1Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 1 document the company filed. The 106 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.