Technomed Devices India Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does: buys cardiac consumables (stents, balloons, guidewires, catheters, sheaths) and hospital equipment from manufacturers in India and supplies them to hospitals, medical colleges and pharmacies, and sells gloves made for it by a third party under its own Techno Touch brand; it makes nothing itself (DRHP p.99, DRHP p.107).

Who pays it: hospitals and healthcare institutions brought 79.29% of FY26 sales and pharmacies 18.43% (DRHP p.99). Government tenders were 62.37% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.25). Uttar Pradesh was 88.16% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.24). Customers are not named.

Why it is raising money: ₹11.5 crore of the fresh issue is for working capital in FY27, and the rest, not yet sized, for general corporate purposes (DRHP p.76). There is no offer for sale (DRHP p.1).

How fast it has grown: revenue from ₹18.0 crore in FY24 to ₹40.9 crore in FY26, about 50.6% a year, and profit after tax from ₹0.48 crore to ₹2.9 crore, about 145.0% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49). Revenue rose 79.93% in FY26 alone (DRHP p.200).

The one thing to understand: FY26 profit of ₹2.9 crore came with an operating cash outflow of ₹1.8 crore, because inventory doubled to ₹13.9 crore and ₹2.6 crore was advanced to related parties, the promoter's own trading firm among them (DRHP p.49, DRHP p.50, DRHP p.48, DRHP p.179, DRHP p.54).

02The business, in plain words

What Technomed Devices does

Technomed Devices is a trader and distributor of medical goods. It holds ISO 13485:2016 certification and supplies cardiac stents, PTCA balloon catheters, guidewires, catheters, sheaths, a TAVR device and other consumables, plus equipment for ENT, eye, cardiology, pathology and operating theatre departments (DRHP p.99). It states that it has no plant or machinery because it is not a manufacturer, and that installed capacity does not apply to it (DRHP p.107). All its purchases in the three years were from Indian suppliers; it imported nothing (DRHP p.181).

A government or private hospital, medical college or pharmacy needs stents, catheters, gloves or a piece of equipment → the company bids in a tender on GeM or another portal, or quotes directly → it secures supply from the manufacturer or dealer, delivers, installs and trains → it is paid the tender or invoice price (DRHP p.106, DRHP p.107).

The company was incorporated in Lucknow on March 8, 2018 as Technomed Devices India Private Limited and became a public company on July 21, 2026 (DRHP p.55). It works from a rented registered office and two rented godowns in Lucknow, two of them rented from the promoter Rishi Agarwal (DRHP p.110). It had 55 permanent employees at March 31, 2026 and 60 at June 30, 2026, a third of them in sales and marketing (DRHP p.108, DRHP p.109). It sold to more than 268 customers in FY26, about 28 of whom placed repeat orders over the three years (DRHP p.107).

Two newer lines sit beside the distribution business. Gloves made by a licensed third-party manufacturer under the company's MD-6 loan licence are sold as Techno Touch through 7 distributors in Uttar Pradesh and on IndiaMART, Flipkart and Amazon; they brought ₹0.92 crore in FY26, 2.27% of revenue (DRHP p.99, DRHP p.24). Maintenance contracts (AMC and CMC) for equipment it has installed began in FY26 and brought ₹0.03 crore (DRHP p.102).

Earnings equation: Revenue = units supplied × price per unit, by product. The document gives revenue by product and by department but no units and no prices, so neither side of the equation can be filled in from it (DRHP p.105, DRHP p.106). Cardiac stents alone were ₹13.3 crore, 32.63% of FY26 sales (DRHP p.105).

03Where the money comes from

The company reports a single segment, trading of healthcare and surgical products, and sells only in India (DRHP p.191, DRHP p.180). By product line:

Source: DRHP p.101. Inside consumables, the top five products (stents, balloons, guidewires, catheters, sheaths) were 70.86% of FY26 revenue against 89.05% in FY25 and 87.44% in FY24 (DRHP p.25). Stents were 32.63%, balloons 15.86% and guidewires 12.25% of FY26 sales; in equipment, the ENT department was 11.40%, up from nothing in FY25 (DRHP p.105, DRHP p.106).

By customer type, hospitals and healthcare institutions were 79.29% of FY26 sales, pharmacies 18.43% and wholesalers and dealers 2.28%; pharmacies were 4.97% a year earlier (DRHP p.99). By channel, government tenders (B2G) were 62.37% of FY26 revenue, 69.70% in FY25 and 55.74% in FY24 (DRHP p.25). By state, Uttar Pradesh was 88.16% in FY26, after 99.86% in FY25 and 96.87% in FY24; Delhi added 6.21% and Haryana 5.00% in FY26 (DRHP p.24).

Technomed Devices customers: how concentrated the revenue is

Source: DRHP p.23. In FY26 one customer brought about a fifth of revenue, ₹8.5 crore, and the top ten three quarters, ₹30.4 crore (DRHP p.23). So yes, revenue depends on a few customers, in all three years. The document does not name them or say how many are government bodies. There are no long-term contracts; business runs on purchase orders and tenders (DRHP p.25).

The supply side is narrower still. The top ten suppliers were 89.20% of FY26 purchases, the top five 71.73% and the largest 20.77% (DRHP p.23, DRHP p.30). In FY24 the largest supplier alone was 44.05% (DRHP p.23). The company sources from 13 dealers for equipment and has exclusive rights only for some products (DRHP p.26). One related party, Techno Medicals India, the proprietorship of the promoter Rishi Agarwal, supplied ₹4.3 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.52).

04The growth record

Technomed Devices financials: revenue, profit and margins

Source: DRHP p.49, DRHP p.50, DRHP p.48, DRHP p.84, converted from ₹ lakh. Revenue went from ₹18.0 crore in FY24 to ₹40.9 crore in FY26 and profit after tax from ₹0.48 crore to ₹2.9 crore (DRHP p.49).

Our arithmetic over FY24 to FY26: revenue grew about 50.6% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49), EBITDA about 111.2% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.84) and profit after tax about 145.0% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49). EBITDA margin moved from 6.26% to 12.32%, up 606 basis points, so from 6.3% to 12.3% rounded (DRHP p.84). The company gives its own figures as a 50.60% revenue CAGR and a 144.90% PAT CAGR on one page and a PAT CAGR of about 149.9% on another (DRHP p.32, DRHP p.101).

The year ends on March 31 throughout. The restatement cut FY25 profit from ₹0.72 crore as audited to ₹0.63 crore, mainly for gratuity, tax and cut-off adjustments, and left FY24 at ₹0.48 crore after small offsetting changes (DRHP p.158). FY24 and FY25 were audited by Gaurav Saxena & Co. and FY26 by Prakhar Vivan & Company, while the restated statements were examined by a third firm, R Sogani & Associates LLP, because of the statutory auditor's "preoccupation" (DRHP p.144, DRHP p.26).

What sits around the record:

• Cash: operating cash flow was −₹1.8 crore in FY26, ₹1.8 crore in FY25 and −₹2.8 crore in FY24 (DRHP p.50). Inventory rose ₹7.1 crore in FY26 alone (DRHP p.50).
• Other income was ₹0.11 crore, 2.8% of FY26 profit before tax of ₹3.9 crore (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49).
• Debt: borrowings were ₹13.2 crore at March 31, 2026 (DRHP p.48), debt to equity 2.91 times, about 2.9× (DRHP p.189), and net debt, borrowings less ₹0.82 crore of cash and bank balances, about 2.5× FY26 EBITDA (our arithmetic, DRHP p.48). Return on capital employed was 27.48%, so 27.5% rounded (DRHP p.84).
• Customers and channel: the largest customer was 20.89% of FY26 revenue, so 20.9% rounded, the top five 56.04%, so 56.0%, and the top ten 74.76%, so 74.8% (DRHP p.23); the top ten suppliers were 89.20% of FY26 purchases, so 89.2% (DRHP p.23). Uttar Pradesh was 88.16% of FY26 revenue, so 88.2% (DRHP p.24), and government tenders 62.37%, so 62.4% (DRHP p.25).
• Related parties: purchases from Techno Medicals India were ₹4.3 crore, 11.9% of FY26 purchases (our arithmetic, DRHP p.52). Advances to related parties were ₹2.6 crore at March 31, 2026, 85.60% of short-term loans and advances (DRHP p.179).
• Working capital: inventory days were 129, 143 and 130 in FY24 to FY26, so 130 in FY26 (DRHP p.78).
• Contingent liabilities: ₹1.4 crore at March 31, 2026, almost all bank guarantees (DRHP p.51).
• Industry: the company sits in medical devices, as a supplier and distributor of medical consumables and equipment (DRHP p.99).

05What the growth is made of

Revenue rose ₹22.9 crore from FY24 to FY26 (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49). The document puts FY26 growth down to a 79.93% increase in sale of goods, without splitting it further (DRHP p.200). The product tables let it be split by line, though not into volume and price.

Consumables: sales rose from ₹16.4 crore to ₹31.2 crore, ₹14.8 crore of the increase (DRHP p.101). Stents went from ₹6.3 crore to ₹13.3 crore and guidewires from ₹2.5 crore to ₹5.0 crore (DRHP p.105).

Equipment: sales rose from ₹1.6 crore to ₹8.6 crore, ₹7.0 crore of the increase, almost all of it in FY26 (DRHP p.101). ENT equipment alone was ₹4.6 crore in FY26 after nothing in FY25 (DRHP p.106). Purchases of equipment jumped from ₹2.4 crore in FY25 to ₹12.2 crore in FY26, more than FY26 equipment sales, which is part of why inventory doubled (DRHP p.181, DRHP p.48).

New lines: gloves added ₹0.92 crore and maintenance contracts ₹0.03 crore in FY26; commission income rose to ₹0.19 crore (DRHP p.101, DRHP p.180).

Customers and geography: pharmacy sales went from ₹1.1 crore in FY25 to ₹7.5 crore in FY26, and Delhi and Haryana together added ₹4.6 crore of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.99, DRHP p.24). Sales to the promoter's firm Techno Medicals India, which the document says caters to private hospitals and pharmacies, rose from ₹0.01 crore in FY25 to ₹1.3 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.33, DRHP p.52).

The offer document does not disclose units sold or prices by product, so the increase cannot be separated into volume and price. That is the finding.

06Earnings quality

The item that needs explaining is FY26 cash. Profit before tax was ₹3.9 crore, yet operations used ₹1.8 crore (DRHP p.50). Inventory took ₹7.1 crore, receivables ₹2.7 crore and short-term loans and advances ₹3.4 crore, against ₹6.0 crore more owed to suppliers (DRHP p.50). Most of the advances were to suppliers, ₹3.0 crore, and ₹2.6 crore of the total was due from related parties, 85.60% of the line (DRHP p.179). The related-party balance sheet note shows ₹2.6 crore against Techno Medicals India at March 31, 2026 (DRHP p.54).

Receivables themselves are recent: of ₹8.7 crore at March 2026, ₹8.6 crore was less than six months old and none was classed as doubtful (DRHP p.178). The FY26 margin jump is the other item. EBITDA margin doubled from 7.18% to 12.32% in one year (DRHP p.84). The document gives no gross margin by product, but purchases plus the change in inventory were 71.02% of FY26 revenue against 72.90% in FY25 (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49), so most of the margin gain came from overheads growing slower than revenue: employee cost rose 43.66% and other expenses 51.11% while revenue rose 79.93% (DRHP p.201, DRHP p.200).

Finance cost of ₹1.6 crore in FY26 included ₹0.57 crore of loan processing fees, against ₹0.84 crore of interest (DRHP p.182). The company also records that the audit trail for earlier years was not preserved as the rules require (DRHP p.192).

07The balance sheet

At March 31, 2026 total assets were ₹29.4 crore: inventory ₹13.9 crore, trade receivables ₹8.7 crore, short-term loans and advances ₹3.6 crore, property, plant and equipment ₹1.1 crore, cash and bank balances ₹0.82 crore, fixed deposits over twelve months ₹0.54 crore and mutual fund units ₹0.43 crore (DRHP p.48). Against them: short-term borrowings ₹13.0 crore, long-term borrowings ₹0.18 crore, trade payables ₹10.1 crore, provisions ₹1.2 crore and net worth ₹4.5 crore (DRHP p.48). Cash in current accounts and on hand was ₹0.13 crore; the rest of the cash line is fixed deposits under lien to Union Bank of India for bank guarantees (DRHP p.179).

Borrowings at March 31, 2026 by type: a Union Bank of India cash credit of ₹10.5 crore at 8.85%, offset by a ₹1.6 crore credit balance in the old Indian Bank account, so ₹8.8 crore net; channel financing from Siemens Factoring Private Limited of ₹3.8 crore at 7.50%, repayable on demand; term and car loans from banks of ₹0.35 crore; and NBFC loans of ₹0.20 crore at 16% to 17%; of the last two, ₹0.37 crore falls due within a year (DRHP p.168, DRHP p.169, DRHP p.162, DRHP p.164, DRHP p.161). By June 30, 2026 fund-based debt had risen to ₹18.5 crore (DRHP p.34).

The Union Bank lines are secured on stock and book debts, on a commercial building at B-43 Vibhuti Khand owned by Rishi Agarwal, valued by the bank at ₹7.5 crore, and on a house owned by Rahul Rajan valued at ₹1.1 crore, with personal guarantees from all three promoters (DRHP p.163). Contingent liabilities were ₹1.4 crore, of which bank guarantees ₹1.3 crore; capital commitments were nil (DRHP p.51). Debt service coverage was 3.21 times in FY26 and 0.88 times in FY24 (DRHP p.189).

Source: DRHP p.48, DRHP p.76, DRHP p.205. None of the issue money is earmarked for repaying debt, and the capitalisation statement leaves the post-issue column blank (DRHP p.205). The working capital plan assumes ₹18.8 crore of borrowings and internal accruals alongside the ₹11.5 crore from the issue in FY27 (DRHP p.78).

08What the money is for

Technomed Devices IPO objects: what the money is for

Source: DRHP p.76, DRHP p.79. The fresh issue in rupees depends on the price, which is not set, so the share of each object cannot be worked out (DRHP p.1).

Working capital, ₹11.5 crore: to be spent in FY27 (DRHP p.77). The company projects a working capital gap of ₹30.3 crore at March 2027, against ₹15.0 crore at March 2026, with inventory of ₹20.8 crore and receivables of ₹16.0 crore (DRHP p.78). The projection rests on the company's own assumption that revenue rises to ₹65.3 crore in FY27, a figure the company states, not one this study makes (DRHP p.78). It also assumes receivable days of 69, inventory days of 137 and payable days cut to 65 so as to pay suppliers sooner (DRHP p.78).

General corporate purposes: the balance, for operating expenses, business development and marketing among other things, capped by the rule above (DRHP p.79).

The objects have not been appraised by any bank or financial institution, no monitoring agency is appointed because the issue is below ₹50.0 crore, and the audit committee will monitor use of the money (DRHP p.81). No definitive arrangements have been made for the money (DRHP p.35).

Into the business the whole fresh issue of up to 5,76,000 shares, at a price not yet set (DRHP p.1). To selling shareholders nothing; there is no offer for sale (DRHP p.1).

09Who is selling

Technomed Devices IPO offer for sale: who is selling

The cover gives the offer for sale as nil, and the abridged prospectus says the details are not applicable because the whole issue is fresh (DRHP p.1, AP p.1). Promoters and the promoter group will not take part in the issue (DRHP p.75). Promoters did transfer shares in the weeks before filing: 9,698 shares to two individuals at ₹480 a share in September 2026, before the bonus (DRHP p.85). They are set out under section 09.

10Promoters

The promoters are Rishi Agarwal, Rahul Rajan and Vidhi Agarwal (DRHP p.139). Together they hold 81.70% before the issue; with the promoter group, Sarth Agarwal and Supriya Agarwal, the holding is 90.30% (DRHP p.71). The document lists Rishi Agarwal as husband of Vidhi Agarwal, Sarth Agarwal as son of both, and Supriya Agarwal as spouse of Rahul Rajan (DRHP p.129, DRHP p.142).

Rishi Agarwal, aged 47, is Chairman and Managing Director, holds a management diploma and a doctorate in management, and started the proprietorship Techno Medicals India in 2005; the document credits 21 years in healthcare products (DRHP p.126, DRHP p.128). Rahul Rajan, aged 45, is Whole-Time Director, has 17 years in healthcare sales and marketing and was earlier with Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (DRHP p.126, DRHP p.128).

Vidhi Agarwal, aged 44, is a Non-Executive Director with about 15 years in training and education (DRHP p.127, DRHP p.128). Rishi Agarwal and Vidhi Agarwal are also directors of Technosurg Sales India Private Limited and Technomed Educators Private Limited (DRHP p.126, DRHP p.127). None of the directors has sat on the board of a listed company (DRHP p.39).

Pay: the three promoters were paid ₹0.48 crore in FY24 (Rahul Rajan ₹0.28 crore, Vidhi Agarwal ₹0.20 crore, Rishi Agarwal nothing) and ₹0.62 crore in FY26 (Rahul Rajan ₹0.28 crore, Vidhi Agarwal ₹0.20 crore, Rishi Agarwal ₹0.14 crore), so ₹0.48 cr → ₹0.62 cr (DRHP p.52). The approved ceilings from July 27, 2026 are ₹0.48 crore a year for Rishi Agarwal and ₹0.30 crore for Rahul Rajan (DRHP p.129).

Loans to the company: the promoters lent the company interest-free money repayable on demand; ₹0.88 crore was outstanding at March 31, 2025 and all of it was repaid during FY26 (DRHP p.53, DRHP p.169).

Property: the registered office and Godown-I are rented from Rishi Agarwal from May 1, 2026 at ₹1.50 lakh a month together, about ₹0.18 crore a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.110). Godown-II is rented from Universal Surgical Supplier, the proprietorship of Ravindra Kumar Agarwal, whom the promoter group table lists as Rishi Agarwal's father, at ₹0.50 lakh a month from July 1, 2026 (DRHP p.110, DRHP p.142).

Other business: Techno Medicals India, Rishi Agarwal's proprietorship, supplies, distributes and sells medical consumables and equipment to private hospitals and pharmacies, a business similar to the company's; a non-compete agreement dated April 1, 2022 divides their areas (DRHP p.33, DRHP p.125). The company bought ₹4.3 crore from it and sold it ₹1.3 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.52). Group companies are Rajendra Infracons (India) Private Limited, in construction, and Neoveda Derivatives Limited, formerly Suntech Medical Systems Limited, which lost ₹1.7 crore in FY23, ₹0.31 crore in FY24 and ₹0.17 crore in FY25 (DRHP p.216, DRHP p.33). Neither is listed (DRHP p.218).

Pledges and guarantees: no promoter shares are pledged (DRHP p.71). The promoters guarantee the bank lines personally and have mortgaged their own property to Union Bank of India (DRHP p.163).

Cases: there are no criminal or material civil cases against the promoters, and no SEBI or stock exchange action (DRHP p.207, DRHP p.209). There are 17 tax proceedings against the promoters, so 17 tax proceedings in all (DRHP p.209). Two are income tax demands on Rishi Agarwal of ₹0.02 crore and ₹0.04 crore, eleven are TDS defaults of ₹0.04 crore in total, and four are GST matters against Techno Medicals India (DRHP p.208).

Two of the GST matters are show cause notices that propose, and do not yet determine, ₹3.4 crore for FY 2020-21 on input tax credit alleged to come from bogus or ineligible supplies, and ₹1.4 crore for FY 2022-23 (DRHP p.208, DRHP p.209). The document adds the 17 matters to ₹4.9 crore (DRHP p.209).

Promoter economics: the average cost of the promoters' shares is ₹0.53 for Rishi Agarwal and ₹0.63 each for Vidhi Agarwal and Rahul Rajan (DRHP p.71). Vidhi Agarwal subscribed at ₹10 in 2018, and Vidhi Agarwal and Rahul Rajan took 40,000 shares each in a ₹10 rights issue in November 2018 (DRHP p.66).

Rishi Agarwal bought 35,000 shares at ₹10 from Supriya Agrawal and Rahul Rajan in March 2024 and 16,000 at ₹10 from Vidhi Agarwal in October 2025, then received 9,000 as a gift in September 2026 (DRHP p.70). On September 15 and 16, 2026 Vidhi Agarwal and Rahul Rajan sold 9,698 shares to Arbind Kumar Mishra and Manish Kumar Keshari at ₹480, ₹0.47 crore in all (DRHP p.85).

All these prices are before the 15:1 bonus of September 16, 2026, after which ₹480 equals ₹30 a share (our arithmetic, DRHP p.66).

11Who already owns it

Technomed Devices promoter holding before and after the IPO

Source: DRHP p.69. There are 16,00,000 shares of ₹10 before the issue and 7 shareholders (DRHP p.46, DRHP p.74). The document leaves the after-issue holding blank until the price is fixed (DRHP p.71). If all 5,76,000 new shares are issued, the total becomes 21,76,000 and the promoters' 81.70% becomes about 60.1%, so 81.7% → 60.1% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.69), and promoters with the promoter group go from 90.30% to about 66.4%, so 90.3% → 66.4% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.71).

There is no fund, company or institution among the shareholders; all seven are individuals (DRHP p.69). The two holders outside the family came in during September 2026. Arbind Kumar Mishra bought 5,499 shares at ₹480 from Vidhi Agarwal and Rahul Rajan on September 15, 2026 (DRHP p.85).

The document lists an Arbind Mishra holding 88,000 shares among senior management, appointed on September 18, 2026 and described as business head for institutional sales (DRHP p.137, DRHP p.101). Manish Kumar Keshari bought 4,199 shares at ₹480 from Vidhi Agarwal on September 16, 2026 (DRHP p.85). The weighted average cost of these secondary purchases was ₹187.34 a share (DRHP p.85).

A year earlier, on September 30, 2025, the company had three shareholders: Vidhi Agarwal 50.00%, Rishi Agarwal 35.00% and Rahul Rajan 15.00% (DRHP p.69).

12What changed just before the IPO

• Revenue and profit: revenue went from ₹18.0 crore in FY24 to ₹40.9 crore in FY26 and profit after tax from ₹0.48 crore to ₹2.9 crore (DRHP p.49).
• Receivables went from 75 days in FY24 to 65 days in FY26, with 89 in between (DRHP p.78).
• Promoter pay went from ₹0.48 crore in FY24 to ₹0.62 crore in FY26, with ₹0.77 crore in FY25 (DRHP p.52).
• New lines: Techno Touch and Techno Guard gloves were introduced in 2025 and maintenance contracts began in FY26 (DRHP p.123, DRHP p.99).
• Banks: Union Bank of India took over the Indian Bank facilities on August 2, 2025 and sanctioned a ₹11.5 crore cash credit (DRHP p.163, DRHP p.164).
• Promoter loans of ₹0.88 crore were repaid in full during FY26 (DRHP p.53).
• Related-party advance: ₹2.6 crore was due from related parties at March 31, 2026, against nothing a year earlier (DRHP p.179).
• Rent: new rent agreements with Rishi Agarwal from May 1, 2026 and with Universal Surgical Supplier from July 1, 2026 (DRHP p.110).
• Registered office moved to Jankipuram on May 14, 2026 and back to B-43 Vibhuti Khand on September 16, 2026 (DRHP p.122).
• Auditor change: Gaurav Saxena & Co. resigned on June 5, 2026 citing preoccupation, and Prakhar Vivan & Company was appointed on June 24, 2026 (DRHP p.62).
• Public company: converted with a fresh certificate dated July 21, 2026 (DRHP p.55).
• Board: Rishi Agarwal became Chairman and Managing Director and Rahul Rajan Whole-Time Director from July 27, 2026, two independent directors joined on August 1, 2026, and a CFO and company secretary from July 27, 2026 (DRHP p.131, DRHP p.137).
• Share transfers at ₹480 a share to two individuals on September 15 and 16, 2026 (DRHP p.85).
• Bonus issue: 15:1, 15,00,000 shares allotted September 16, 2026, the last allotment before the IPO, with no price paid (DRHP p.66).
• Pre-IPO placement: none; apart from the bonus, no shares were issued in the two years before the filing (DRHP p.67).
• Share split: no split appears in the share capital history; every allotment is at a face value of ₹10 (DRHP p.66).
• Staff went from 30 at the start of FY26 to 55 at the end (DRHP p.109).
• Group company Suntech Medical Systems Limited was renamed Neoveda Derivatives Limited on July 14, 2026 (DRHP p.216).

13Capacity and expansion

Source: DRHP p.110, DRHP p.107, DRHP p.212. The company does not manufacture, owns no plant or machinery and says installed capacity and utilisation do not apply to it (DRHP p.107). The issue funds no capital expenditure; the money goes to working capital, mainly stock and receivables (DRHP p.78). The document gives no warehouse capacity, no units and no order book, so the chain from capacity to revenue cannot be drawn.

14Market size and industry structure

Technomed Devices industry: market size and growth

As claimed: the Industry Overview chapter is not drawn from a report the company commissioned. It is compiled from public sources, the World Bank's Global Economic Prospects of June 2026 and IBEF presentations of May 2026 among them, with government websites, EY and news articles, which the company says it has not verified (DRHP p.89, DRHP p.91, DRHP p.93, DRHP p.94, DRHP p.98). The chapter, citing these sources, puts India's medical device industry at ₹94,017 crore to ₹1,02,564 crore (US$ 11 billion to 12 billion) in FY24, about 1.6% of the global market (DRHP p.94).

The part that is addressable: the company trades in two pieces of that market, cardiac consumables and hospital equipment, and sells 88.16% of it in Uttar Pradesh, much of it through government tenders (DRHP p.24, DRHP p.25). The chapter gives no figure for Uttar Pradesh, for cardiac consumables, for distribution or for government procurement, so the addressable part is not sized anywhere in the document.

What the company is today: FY26 revenue of ₹40.9 crore is about 0.04% of the lower end of the FY24 national figure (our arithmetic, DRHP p.49, DRHP p.94). The comparison is loose, because the national figure counts the value of devices at all levels and the company's revenue is a trader's sales.

Size over time: the chapter does not give a series of past market sizes for medical devices. It quotes IBEF's figure that India's medical devices market will grow from US$ 15.2 billion in 2025 to US$ 50.1 billion by 2030, and the National Medical Devices Policy, 2023 expectation of growth from US$ 11 billion to US$ 50 billion by 2030 (DRHP p.94, DRHP p.96). These are the sources' projections as the chapter repeats them, not figures from the company's accounts. For the wider healthcare sector, the chapter gives ₹29,21,668 crore (US$ 372 billion) in 2023 and the hospital market at US$ 122.3 billion in 2025 (DRHP p.93).

Segments: the chapter divides the Indian device market into electronic equipment, 56% of it, disposables and consumables 26.5%, in-vitro diagnostics 8.1%, implants 7.1% and surgical instruments 2.3% (DRHP p.94). The company's balloons, guidewires, catheters, sheaths and gloves fall in disposables and consumables, and its ENT, eye and cardiology machines in equipment (DRHP p.103, DRHP p.104). The chapter does not say where cardiac stents sit; the company books them as medical consumables (DRHP p.105).

What drives demand: the chapter names a rising number of medical facilities, better insurance coverage, improved infrastructure and government policy (DRHP p.94), rising incomes, an ageing population and health awareness (DRHP p.93), and 10,023 new medical college seats funded with ₹15,034.5 crore for FY26 to FY29 (DRHP p.97). The Union Budget 2026-27 allocated ₹1,06,530 crore to healthcare (DRHP p.95). For the company's own state, it notes an Uttar Pradesh Medical Device Park with 101 plots allotted and ₹1,291 crore of investment (DRHP p.95).

Structure: the chapter does not describe how fragmented distribution is or name distributors. Its named companies are manufacturers investing in India, such as Medtronic, Siemens Healthineers and Omron Healthcare (DRHP p.97). The business chapter says the company faces both unorganised players and established companies, competing on price, quality and delivery, and names Entero Healthcare Solutions Ltd and Poly Medicure Limited as listed competitors (DRHP p.108). In tenders, contracts usually go to the lowest bidder that meets the criteria (DRHP p.25).

Inputs and trade: for a trader, the input is the product itself. The chapter says domestic production rose from 10% to 30% of India's requirement over five years, implying the rest is imported, and that device exports rose from US$ 2.9 billion in FY22 to US$ 4.1 billion in FY25 (DRHP p.95). Exports for April to December of FY26 were ₹28,106 crore (DRHP p.94). The company itself imports nothing and buys everything from Indian suppliers (DRHP p.181).

Rules: devices are regulated under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Medical Devices Rules, 2017, which grade devices from Class A to Class D by risk and govern their sale and distribution, including stents and gloves (DRHP p.111). Drug prices fall under the Drug (Prices Control) Order, 2013, which sets ceiling prices for listed formulations, and the national policy aims at pricing regulation for devices (DRHP p.112).

The company holds drug sale licences in Forms 20B and 21B, an MD-6 loan licence for gloves, ISO 13485:2016, an IS 13422 licence from the Bureau of Indian Standards and a bio-medical waste authorisation (DRHP p.212, DRHP p.213, DRHP p.214). A pharmacy licence and a shop and establishment registration were applied for but not yet received (DRHP p.215).

The Department of Pharmaceuticals has sought views on exempting more than 350 devices from global tender rules, while the Make in India procurement preference continues (DRHP p.96).

What the chapter says can go wrong: the chapter is largely about the economy. It records that the Middle East conflict has pushed commodity prices up an expected 22% in 2026 and global inflation to a projected 4% (DRHP p.89, DRHP p.91), and that growth could slow if trade tensions or financial conditions worsen (DRHP p.90). It says nothing about risks particular to device distribution. Those appear in the risk factors instead: tender competition and lower bids, dependence on a few suppliers and on Uttar Pradesh, and pricing pressure from larger competitors (DRHP p.25, DRHP p.22, DRHP p.23, DRHP p.30).

15Competitive position

Technomed Devices competitors

Source: DRHP p.49, DRHP p.84, DRHP p.48, DRHP p.108. The document gives no figures for either named competitor and says there is no listed company in India with a business directly comparable to its own (DRHP p.83, DRHP p.37).

What the company puts forward: a range across three product categories, an own glove brand, distributorship agreements with some suppliers, some of them exclusive, empanelment on GeM, ISO 13485 and IS 13422 certification, and promoters with long experience (DRHP p.100, DRHP p.101). Two industry awards are listed, including one from Terumo for FY22 (DRHP p.123).

Against that: the document itself says competition is mainly on price and relationships, that tenders go to the lowest bidder, that several product arrangements are not exclusive, that its trademarks are objected to or under examination, and that it depends on a few suppliers and one state (DRHP p.30, DRHP p.25, DRHP p.26, DRHP p.110, DRHP p.23).

16Peers the company named

Peers named in the offer document: none (DRHP p.83).

The basis for issue price says no listed company in India is engaged in a business similar to the company's, so no peer comparison or KPI comparison is given (DRHP p.83, DRHP p.84). The business chapter does name Entero Healthcare Solutions Ltd and Poly Medicure Limited as listed companies it competes with, but only by name (DRHP p.108). With no price band and no peers, no ratio comparison can be made. The company's FY26 earnings per share is ₹18.00 after the bonus (DRHP p.82).

17Risks, in plain words

Technomed Devices IPO risks

Customers: one customer was 20.89% of FY26 revenue and the top ten 74.76% (DRHP p.23) → with no long-term contracts, losing one of them removes a share the company cannot replace quickly (DRHP p.25) → the top ten were 83.47% a year earlier (DRHP p.23).

Customers: government tenders: 62.37% of FY26 revenue came from government tenders (DRHP p.25) → tenders usually go to the lowest bidder that qualifies and can be delayed, cancelled or re-tendered (DRHP p.25) → that share was 69.70% in FY25 (DRHP p.25).

Business: one state: Uttar Pradesh was 88.16% of FY26 revenue and all operations run from Lucknow (DRHP p.24) → a local disruption or a change in state procurement reaches most of the business.

Suppliers: the top ten suppliers were 89.20% of FY26 purchases and the top five 71.73%, with no long-term contracts (DRHP p.23, DRHP p.30) → a supplier who stops or appoints another distributor takes product lines with it; the largest supplier was 44.05% of purchases in FY24 (DRHP p.23).

Business: product mix: the top five consumables were 70.86% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.25) → a price cut or a lost supplier on stents, 32.63% of FY26 sales, would show in revenue at once (DRHP p.105).

Financial: cash and working capital: operating cash flow was negative in FY24 and FY26, −₹1.8 crore in FY26, and inventory is 130 days of sales (DRHP p.50, DRHP p.78) → growth is financed by bank lines and supplier credit, and borrowings reached ₹18.5 crore by June 30, 2026 (DRHP p.34).

Financial: debt on demand: ₹4.6 crore of unsecured loans, mostly Siemens Factoring channel finance, were repayable on demand at June 30, 2026 (DRHP p.33, DRHP p.196) → a lender recall would need other finance. The company also says it has paid dues to financial institutions late in the past (DRHP p.34).

Promoters: related-party trade: Techno Medicals India, Rishi Agarwal's proprietorship in a similar business, sold the company ₹4.3 crore and owed it ₹2.6 crore of advances at March 2026 (DRHP p.52, DRHP p.179) → money and business can move between the two despite a non-compete agreement (DRHP p.33).

Promoters: tax notices: show cause notices against Techno Medicals India propose ₹3.4 crore and ₹1.4 crore of GST, not yet determined (DRHP p.208, DRHP p.209) → the firm is a supplier and customer of the company and its proprietor is the managing director.

Regulation and compliance: provident fund dues were paid late 12 times in FY26 and GSTR-1 returns late 8 times in 12 in FY26 (DRHP p.32) → forms with the Registrar of Companies were also filed late and a vehicle loan charge was never registered (DRHP p.28) → a pharmacy licence and shop registration are still pending (DRHP p.215).

Issue-specific: the promoters' average cost is ₹0.53 to ₹0.63 a share, and two individuals paid ₹480 before the bonus, ₹30 after, in September 2026 (DRHP p.71, DRHP p.85, our arithmetic) → the issue funds only working capital and general purposes, with no monitoring agency (DRHP p.76, DRHP p.81).

18Litigation and regulatory matters

Cases against Technomed Devices and its promoters

Criminal: none by or against the company, promoters, directors or key managerial and senior management personnel (DRHP p.206, DRHP p.207, DRHP p.210). Regulatory: no actions by statutory or regulatory authorities against the company, and no SEBI or stock exchange action against the promoters (DRHP p.207, DRHP p.209). Civil: no material civil litigation (DRHP p.207). Tax: the company has 2 tax cases of ₹0.02 crore; the promoters 17 of ₹4.9 crore, 13 direct and 4 indirect (DRHP p.29). Group companies: no material litigation (DRHP p.209).

The materiality threshold for disclosing a case is ₹0.07 crore (DRHP p.206). The company also records late filings with the Registrar of Companies and errors in past filings, for which no notice has been received (DRHP p.28, DRHP p.29).

19Related-party transactions

Source: DRHP p.52, DRHP p.53. Director remuneration was ₹0.28 crore a year to Rahul Rajan and ₹0.20 crore a year to Vidhi Agarwal in all three years, and ₹0.14 crore in FY26 and ₹0.29 crore in FY25 to Rishi Agarwal (DRHP p.52). Supriya Agarwal drew ₹0.13 crore of salary in FY26, Nidhi Agarwal ₹0.07 crore of commission, and rent of ₹0.03 crore went to Om Prakash Agarwal and Universal Surgical Suppliers (DRHP p.52). Rishi Agarwal spent ₹0.60 crore on the company's behalf in FY26 and was reimbursed ₹0.61 crore (DRHP p.53).

At March 31, 2026 the company had ₹2.6 crore due from related parties under short-term loans and advances, and the related-party balance note shows that amount against Techno Medicals India; at March 31, 2024, ₹0.89 crore was due from the same firm (DRHP p.179, DRHP p.54, DRHP p.53). Promoter loans of ₹0.88 crore at March 31, 2025 were repaid to nil (DRHP p.53).

What appeared or changed in the two years before filing: purchases from Techno Medicals India grew from ₹2.8 crore to ₹4.3 crore and sales to it from ₹0.01 crore to ₹1.3 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.52); the ₹2.6 crore advance appeared in FY26 (DRHP p.179); repairs paid to Rajendra Infracons (India) Private Limited began in FY26 (DRHP p.52); and rent agreements with Rishi Agarwal and Universal Surgical Supplier were signed in May and July 2026 (DRHP p.110). The company says the transactions were at arm's length (DRHP p.54).

20What the offer document does not say

Customers and suppliers are not named, and the share of the largest customers that are government bodies is not given. Units sold, prices and gross margin by product are not given, so the earnings equation cannot be filled in. Which products are under exclusive distribution, and from which suppliers, is not listed. Tender win rates, bids lost and any order book are not disclosed.

What the ₹2.6 crore advance to related parties is for and when it will be settled is not stated (DRHP p.179). The terms of trade with Techno Medicals India, beyond the arm's length statement and the non-compete, are not given. The financial results of the group companies are left to the company website (DRHP p.217). The Industry Overview chapter gives no figure for Uttar Pradesh, for cardiac consumables or for device distribution.

The issue size in rupees, the price band, the general corporate purposes amount and the issue expenses are blank (DRHP p.76). The after-issue shareholding is blank (DRHP p.71). The market maker is not yet named (DRHP p.63).

Some inconsistencies are recorded as document matters, not business ones: the FY25 largest supplier is printed as 333.10% of the total, where ₹5.5 crore of ₹16.7 crore of purchases is about 33.1% (DRHP p.23, our arithmetic, DRHP p.49); the supplier table is headed "% of total revenue" on one page and described as a share of purchases on another (DRHP p.23, DRHP p.30);

the PAT CAGR is 144.90% on one page and about 149.9% on another (DRHP p.32, DRHP p.101); the FY24 hospital share is printed as 0.82 instead of a percentage (DRHP p.99); the FY25 B2G amount is printed as 1.585.14 (DRHP p.25); a risk factor speaks of past delays in paying financial institutions while the history chapter says the company has not defaulted (DRHP p.34, DRHP p.125);

the risk factors open by citing page numbers that do not match the chapters (DRHP p.22); and the guest house rent agreement runs for 11 months from January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2027 (DRHP p.110).

21Five questions for management

1. How many units of stents, balloons, guidewires and catheters were supplied in FY24, FY25 and FY26, and at what average price, so that FY26 growth can be split into volume and price?
2. What is the ₹2.6 crore due from related parties at March 31, 2026 for, on what terms was it advanced to Techno Medicals India, and how much has been settled since?
3. Of FY26 revenue of ₹40.9 crore, how much came from the largest customer and the top ten by name or type, and how many of them are government hospitals reached through tenders?
4. How was the ₹12.2 crore of equipment bought in FY26 used, and how much of the ₹13.9 crore of inventory at March 2026 is equipment that has not yet been delivered or installed?
5. What would gross margin have been in FY26 without the ₹4.3 crore of goods bought from Techno Medicals India, and on what prices did the two trade?

1Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 1 document the company filed. The 199 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.