An

Research Paper

ON

“Lead lag relation of corporate debt restructuring and stock performance: A study of
infrastructure and construction sector of India. “

Submitted by

Shaikh Mo. Imran A. Saeed (Author 1) Saiyed Farhin A (Author 2)

Assistant Professor S.R. Luthra Institute Of Management
S.R. LUTHRA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT Affiliated to Gujarat Technological
Affiliated to Gujarat Technological University -AICTE University -AICTE
Mobile: 9879068469 Mobile: 9106758326
Email: imran15381@gmail.com Email: imran15381@gmail.com
“Lead lag relation of corporate debt restructuring and stock performance: A study of
infrastructure and construction sector of India. “

Authors 1:
Shaikh Mo. Imran A.saeed
Assistant Professor
S.R. LUTHRA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT
Affiliated to Gujarat Technological University -AICTE
Mobile: 9879068469
Email: imran15381@gmail.com

Author 2:
Saiyed Farhin A (Author 2)
S.R. Luthra Institute of Management
Affiliated to Gujarat Technological University -AICTE
Mobile: 9106758326
Email: imran15381@gmail.com

“Lead lag relation of corporate debt restructuring and stock performance: A study of
infrastructure and construction sector of India. “

Abstract

The era of world recession of 2007 to 2012 was very bad for the developed market as well as
emerging market. The economy in United States of America, European economy and Indian
economy along with Asian economy faced very grave time to do the business. It took 5 years
for some economy to decide the track of the growth, still European market has not recovered.
Means talking to Indian economy. Approximately 4500 companied listed on BSE and 1900
companies on NSE. Finding these companies for doing business – a very difficult task,
especially when bank scam took place like King Fisher and Nirav Modi and so many others.
Companies find very difficult time to do business specially infrastructure and construction
companies which requires heavy capital. The post-restructuring performance of the firms has
been compared with their pre restructuring performance and with their “T “test. The
performance has been measured with the help of operating margin (EBDITA as a percentage
of total income) and interest coverage ratio. The findings of this study reveal that sample
firms were not able to improve their performance even up to five years after debt
restructuring and they were performing significantly below their industry peers.
Key words: corporate debt restructuring, EBIT, stock price Under Value, Over valued
Track III: Innovative finance strategies.
 I. Introduction
After the World War 1 World War 2, economies around the world faces dire situation. It was
very difficult to do the business and survive in the market. Compare to a time before 70
years. Last ten years of the world economy are more difficult compare to world war time. As
compliance become stronger, company faces more problem to do the business. In this
prevailing economic climate, as companies look for ways to access cash, one method to
relieve pressure and free up additional cash flow is to restructure the debt of your
organization. This gives your company the flexibility it needs to keep operating, while
allowing time to fix any underlying issues within the organization. For the lending institution,
it allows the debt to stay current, classifies it as performing and avoids potential reserves.
A restructuring of debt can also, at times, help avoid bankruptcy, which is typically a last
ditch effort to keep the company operating and possibly avoid debt repayment altogether.
While many creditors may not agree to this type of arrangement immediately, some will
come to understand that it may be beneficial for them to help ease the burden of the company
rather than hasten a potential downfall by remaining firm in a position of collection or
foreclosure.
In some cases, companies are able to get debt holders to write down the debt or write off a
portion of the debt. This is typically done with trade debt. Institutional debt write-downs
happen in rare occasions and usually occur when another party comes in to buy out the debt
at a deep discount. Most institutions will not write down or write off part of the debt with the
same debtor, although this can happen. It really depends upon the leverage a company might
have in the negotiations, the collateral position and the condition of the lending institution.
The core issues being faced by the management team will determine the type of restructuring
that may work. Short-term liquidity needs can often be addressed with a principle holiday, in
which a company is not required to make principle payments for a period of time (typically
three to six months and sometimes up to a year). Interest is still charged and due each
payment period, but by eliminating a regular principle payment, a significant amount of cash
can be freed up. For long-term needs, it may make sense to utilize lower interest rates and
longer amortization schedules and also take a portion of the principle and put it on the back
end with a balloon payment.
But before you reach out to your lenders for a debt restructuring plan, you should develop a
business plan to show lenders that you have a handle on the issue and are in a position to
move the company in a positive direction. This is not a hastily thrown together plan, but one
based upon strategies that reflect current conditions and how management might take
advantage of them. Most lenders will discount the revenue projections if they are
significantly different than industry performance, unless the company has some truly
disruptive technology or differentiator. What most lenders will want to see is a plan that has
cost reductions to reflect the current revenue picture along with some revenue growth, which
should be based upon new products, new customers and possibly even new markets.
What are the creditors’ and/or lenders’ objectives?
Creditors who often agree to negotiate the terms of the debt agreement focus on the following
objectives:
 Support the objective of a struggling debtor company to financially recover
 Enable strong debtors to carry on as before with their business operations
 Agree to a feasible, equitable and fair debt repayment plan to creditors
 Secure the collateral position of the note to support repayment
 Look for a significant portion of revenues from operations to be set aside to support
part of the payment to creditors
 Safeguard the money lent by financial institutions through additional collateral or in
lending additional funds that will elevate the financial position of the company
Understanding the lenders’ objectives will help you position your case to meet those
objectives while helping lenders meet their own.
Corporate debt restructuring should be completed one step at a time. The following are the
steps that need to be taken with the lender before a final agreement on a restructured debt
instrument can be signed.
Consultation between the lender and debtor—Business debt restructuring is essentially an
aggregate loan agreement, which accumulates a number of discussions and agreements. To
reach that point of an agreement, the lender will hold a series of sessions with the borrower.
During these meetings, the lender assesses the company’s overall financial situation and
evaluates management competency to be successful under a restructured business. It’s at this
point that all the company’s financial obligations are evaluated against the expected regular
cash flow. This is the period where the lender gains comfort that the debtor can repay the new
restructured loan and will be able to correct any underlying business issues.
Negotiation begins—once the assessment procedure is finished, the lender then negotiates a
settlement agreement for the new note or forbearance with the debtor and possibly with other
creditors and vendors of the debtor. All parties need to be accepting of the revised agreement
—even the other creditors of the business.
Some liquidation of assets may be required—in some cases, restructuring existing debt may
require a payment of money up front. Since you may be in a tight cash position, some assets
may have to be liquidated in order to meet the upfront payment. Though, this is not typical as
the lender will probably want as much collateral available as possible.
Restructuring begins—at this stage, the contract is signed and the agreement is enforced. The
borrower, and in this case the business, agrees to the new or revised loan amount and to other
details, including the monthly payment obligation, interest rate, collateral, personal
guarantees and term of payment. After everything is accounted for, the business is officially
under a debt restructuring program and is expected to make payments as stipulated.
The process may appear straightforward, but it can take several months to complete and take
an emotional toll on both parties. It’s important to pace the process, try to keep emotions out
of it and be prepared for some bumps along the way. Consider the support of a professional
consultant who has experience helping businesses through this process. A consultant can help
take emotions out of the equation, assist with preparation of the business plan and understand
the needs of the banks on the other side of the table.

Corporate debt restructuring in India.

The CDR mechanism in India has a three tier structure,
1. CDR Standing Forum
2. CDR Empowered Group
3. CDR Cell

CDR Standing Forum: This forum is a representative body of all banks and financial
institutions participating in the debt restructuring process. This forum includes different
financial institutions and scheduled banks and excludes regional rural banks, non-banking
financial companies and co-operative banks. One responsibility of this forum is to lay down
policies to be followed by the empowered group and the CDR cell and to ensure timely
implementation of the CDR package. A platform is given to both creditors and borrowers to
amicably settle their disputes. The standing forum can review decisions of the empowered
group and the CDR cell. The standing forum comprises of banks such as ICICI, SBI, IDBI
and the chairman of the Indian Banks Association. Most of the big financial institutions in
India that lend money to companies are permanent participating members of the standing
forum.
 CDR Empowered Group: The CDR Empowered Group considers the preliminary report of all
cases of requests of restructuring, submitted to it by the CDR Cell. After the Empowered
Group decides that restructuring of the company is prima-facie feasible and the enterprise is
potentially viable in terms of the policies and guidelines evolved by the Standing Forum, the
detailed restructuring package is worked out by the CDR Cell in conjunction with the Lead
Institution, which is the institution which has the highest exposure in the concerned company.
The Empowered Group examines the viability of the restructuring package and later on gives
its opinion as to whether the package is feasible within 90 days or 180 days. If however, the
restructuring package is not granted then the creditors have the option of exiting the
arrangement, and seeking their own enforcement measures for recovery of their dues.

Section 230 of the Companies Act 2013 includes a new provision for companies proposing a
merger or arrangement, to disclose to the National Companies Law Tribunal in an affidavit, a
past or present scheme of debt restructuring and particulars thereof, which scheme must have
the consent of not less than 75 per cent of the secured creditors by value. The details to be
submitted to the Tribunal include a creditor’s responsibility statement; safeguards for the
protection of other secured and unsecured creditors; an auditor’s report that the fund
requirements of the company after restructuring shall conform to the liquidity test; a
statement where the company proposes to adopt the CDR guidelines; and a valuation report
of the company assets. It is against this backdrop that this paper aims to study and understand
the corporate debt restructuring by analysing some examples of CDR in India. The objectives
may be summarized as follows:
1. To study the CDR mechanism in India as per RBI guidelines.
2. To explore a few examples of CDR in India and study the factors leading to CDR.
3. To understand the effect of CDR through these examples.

II. Concept of restructuring

The concept of restructuring holds relevance in the context of insolvency when the company
is in financial distress as restructuring of a company is done when the company essentially
has a viable business but owing to external factors, it has a bad balance sheet and therefore
incurs losses. These external factors may be factors such as government policy, change of
interest rates, pressure on the domestic currency, among other factors. These situations are
beyond the company’s control and when a company tends to have a bad balance sheet owing
to such unfavourable conditions, it has to be given another opportunity to manage its assets
and liabilities and therefore here the role of debt restructuring is important. The basic
objective of debt restructuring is to ensure that the company’s business stays viable in the
long term and the creditors in turn enter into different arrangements with the company with
respect to foregoing a part of the loan, or exchanging a part of the debt for equity shares in
the company, which is also referred to as the debt equity swap, or creditors agreeing to a
fixed moratorium period where both the company and the creditors agree to refrain from
taking any action against each other during the fixed period. The concept of corporate debt
restructuring is part of the external restructuring mechanism of the company where it has to
ensure that it has the assets to back the restructuring program, because once the company
enters into the zone of insolvency, it has little choices to make and prolonged insolvency then
becomes a ground of winding up the company and it loses its separate legal identity.
However, if proper arrangements are made with the creditors, both the company and the
lenders are satisfied with it and the company is able to keep its business thriving. Corporate
Debt Restructuring (CDR) can take a variety of forms. The plan can provide for conversion
of debt into equity, or preference shares convertible into ordinary shares, adjustment of
secured creditors’ rights, a compromise in which creditors waive a part of their claims or
extend term of their debts, modification of Inter Creditor Agreements (ICAs), valuation and
settlement of contingent claims, and the distribution of assets and discharge of liabilities of
members of a group of companies where these have become inextricably entangled so as to
make it difficult to establish the assets and liabilities of any individual company within the
group. The restructuring of the company involves different stages such as execution of a
standstill agreement, where both the parties mutually agree to refrain from taking any kind of
action to enforce their claims for a certain period, after which information about the
company’s financials is gathered. Post this stage, the parties move to the next stage which is
preparation and consideration of proposals and meanwhile, it is necessary to keep the
company trading, for which purpose it might need additional funding and therefore the
lenders during negotiations may agree to a higher rate of interest to support the additional
funding.

Source : https://www.icsi.edu/portals/70/23112013S2.pdf

Recent cases of corporate debt restructuring in India

Corporate debt restructuring: 291 accounts for Rs 1, 72,463 crore fail
Loan recast packages for over Rs 61,000 crore failed in 12 months ended September
2017 .The pipeline of bad loans for resolution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is
increasing. Corporate debt restructuring (CDR) packages of loan accounts involving Rs
61,691 crore have failed and withdrawn from the CDR cell of the banks in the 12-month
period ended September 2017. According to the CDR cell, corporate debt of 291 corporate
loan accounts amounting to Rs 1,72,463 crore was withdrawn from the cell as of September
2017, compared with Rs 110,772 crore in September 2016 as banks and corporates were
unable to come out with credible turnaround plans. These loans are likely to end up in the
bankruptcy court.
Banks have started taking some of these accounts to the National Company Law Tribunal
(NCLT) under the IBC. “Many of these cases are wilful defaults and involved in fund
diversion. Some of the cases were not even considered for admission to the CDR cell as there
were blatant fund mismanagement and diversion as per forensic audits,” said a banking
source. Total loans approved for CDR were Rs 4, 03,004 crore involving 530 borrowal
accounts as on September 31, 2017. Originally, 655 borrowers sought CDR packages, but
banks rejected the applications of 125 borrowers involving Rs 70,998 crore. Banks have
stopped taking up new CDR packages with many corporate using the CDR route to evergreen
— or keep out of non-performing account (NPA) books — the loan accounts. There were
reports that some banks and corporate used and misused recast schemes such as CDR, 5/25
and the Scheme for Sustainable Structuring of Stressed Assets (S4A) to keep big loans out of
the NPA books. While there are live CDR cases of 130 borrowers involving Rs 1,45,528
crore, many of them are bound to fail as promoters have either failed to bring in their
contributions and personal guarantees or the companies have failed to generate enough
earnings to service the debt.
Source : https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finance/corporate-debt-
restructuring-291-accounts-for-rs-172463-crore-fail-5035239/

Literature reviews :

 Corporate Debt Restructuring: Evidence On Lending Coordination In Financial Distress

by Antje Brunner and Jan Pieter Krahnen October 2001 This Discussion Paper is issued
under the auspices of the Centre’s research programme in Financial Economics. Any
opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and not those of the Centre for
Economic Policy Research. Research disseminated by CEPR may include views on
policy, but the Centre itself takes no institutional policy positions.
 Source:www.researchgate.net/publication/
4840984_Financial_Distress_and_Bank_Restructuring_of_Small_to_Medium_Size_UK_
Companies
 Multiple lenders and corporate distress: Evidence on debt restructuring By Antje
Brunnery and Jan Pieter Krahnen In the recent theoretical literature on lending risk, the
common pool problem in multi-bank relationships has been analyzed extensively. In this
paper we address this topic empirically, relying on unique panel data set that includes
detailed credit-file information on distressed lending relationships. In particular, it
includes information on bank pools, a legal institution aimed at coordinating lender
interests in borrower distress. We find that the existence of small bank pools increases the
probability of workout success and that coordination costs are positively related to pool
size. We identify major determinants of pool formation, in particular the distribution of
lending shares among banks, the number of banks, and the severity of the distress shock
to the borrower.

Source: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=302351

 In a second group of papers, it is argued that the major problem associated with multiple
lending is due to bargaining problems among lenders rather than between lenders and a
common borrower. The common pool or collective action problem addresses the risk of
coordination failure. Although renegotiation is in the collective interest of all creditors,
individually they may …nd pre-emptive debt collection favorable. They will tend to
foreclose on their loans in fear of similar actions by other lenders although the …rm’s
prospects may in fact be sound. Underinvestment will be the consequence. Multiple self-
ful…lling equilibria arise, which resemble a bank run as modelled by Diamond and
Dybvig [1983]. Morris and Shin [1999] apply the idea of coordination risk to corporate
debt and its pricing. A number of papers including Brown [1989], Bebchuk and Chang
[1992], Schwartz [1997], and Longhofer and Peters [1999] discuss how the risk of
coordination failure can be overcome by the implementation of optimal bankruptcy
procedures.

Source:https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/
9a97/8667ed55d1b6622201dff51fc8729e4ab45c.pdf

Reason company going for debt resturcturing (31/3/2016)

Company name Debt equity Current ratio ROE

SUZLON 9.05: 1 0.92 :1 7.6%
JPASSOCIATION 1.9:1 1.03 :1 -23.65%
GMR INFRA 0.6 :1 1.76 : 1 -16.12%
JPPOWER 1.55 : 1 0.26 : 1 - 3.04%
ANSAL INFRA 0.24 :1 1.24 : 1 1.7%
SREI Infrastructure 4.2 : 1 0.45 : 1 2.07%
CG POWER 0.13 : 1 2.15 :1 -26.5%
IVRCL INFRA LTD 8.66 : 1 0.82 : 1 -245.11%

III. Research Design

The data has been collected from secondary sources on six companies that have gone
into CDR for a period of 3 years prior to the year of CDR and 3 years after the CDR.
Data collection has been done from Capitoline and websites of companies. The list of
companies identified for the study is given in Table 1 below
 The ratios identified for the study are taken from the classification of liquidity, solvency,
profitability and activity ratios. These are presented in the table below:
RATIO CLASSIFICATION
ROE PROFITABILITY
DEBT EQUITY SOLVENCY
CURRENT RATIO LIQUIDITY
INVENTORY TURN OVER LIQUIDITY
OPERATING PROFIT RATIO PROFITABILITY

IV. Empirical Findings

Paired sample t test was conducted for a sample of six companies gone through a process of
CDR. Ten key ratios were observed for these 8 companies for 2-3 years before and after the
CDR process. Paired sample t test was conducted for mean of the ratios before and after CDR
process to observe any significant difference (α=0.05) in their performance. Hypothesis for t
test

HO: There is no significant difference in the ratios before and after CDR

Return on equity / net worth

Company name 2014 2015 Mean CDR 2016 2017 2018 Mean
SUZLON -34.7 362.71 164 2016 34.78 -326.95 -146
JPASSOCIATION 3.06 -7.02 -2 2016 -57.7 3.4 -27.54
GMR INFRA 2.28 -4.16 -0.94 2016 -56.52 -42.02 -49.27
JPPOWER 0.31 2.15 1.23 2016 -7.68 5.63 -1.01
ANSAL INFRA 0.82 1.32 1.02 2016 0.52 -2.32 -0.9
SREI Infrastructure 2.2 3.2 2.7 2016 3.35 4.16 3.76
CG POWER 15.6 18.28 16.95 2016 2.96 15.6 9.28
IVRCLINFRALTD -49.51 -59.31 -54.41 2016 -33.46 124.13 45.34
Operating profit ratio

Company name 2014 2015 Mean CDR 2016 2017 2018 Mean
SUZLON -11.21 -16.78 14 2016 24.18 16.75 27.46
JPASSOCIATION 26.39 20.9 23.65 2016 1.29 20.01 10.65
GMR INFRA 33.78 72.21 38 2016 61.96 31.49 46.72
JPPOWER 71.25 68.6 69.93 2016 37.31 40.21 38.76
ANSAL INFRA 8.2 7.7 7.95 2016 8.31 12.15 10.23
SREI Infrastructure 91.7 88.67 90.19 2016 71.4 88.7 80
CG POWER 10.04 9.39 9.715 2016 8.83 8.85 8.84
IVRCLINFRALTD 4.75 0.45 2.6 2016 -16.54 -31.22 23.9

Debt equity ratio

Company name 2014 2015 Mean CDR 2016 2017 2018 Mean
SUZLON 3.13 -5.42 -1.145 2016 5.89 20.16 13.025
JPASSOCIATION 1.72 1.33 1.525 2016 2.42 0.54 1.48
GMR INFRA 0.55 0.42 0.485 2016 0.8 1.3 1.05
JPPOWER 2.77 2.92 2.845 2016 0.97 0.99 0.98
ANSAL INFRA 0.27 0.27 0.27 2016 0.24 0.17 0.205
SREI Infrastructure 4.84 5 4.92 2016 4.08 4.29 4.185
 CG POWER 0.01 0.016 0.013 2016 0.29 0.38 0.335
IVRCLINFRALTD 2.45 3.78 3.115 2016 9.25 -3.88 2.685
Current ratio

Company name 2014 2015 Mean CDR 2016 2017 2018 Mean
SUZLON 0.71 1.09 0.9 2016 0.83 0.7 0.765
JPASSOCIATION 1.05 1.15 1.1 2016 0.63 0.86 0.745
GMR INFRA 0.76 0.87 0.815 2016 0.77 0.48 0.625
JPPOWER 0.33 0.26 0.295 2016 0.23 0.65 0.44
ANSAL INFRA 1.22 1.25 1.235 2016 1.29 1.23 1.26
SREI Infrastructure 0.7 0.6 0.65 2016 0.56 0.59 0.575
CG POWER 1.88 2.51 2.195 2016 2.31 1.86 2.085
IVRCLINFRALTD 0.7 0.92 0.81 2016 0.65 0.38 0.515

Inventory turnover ratio

Company name 2014 2015 Mean CDR 2016 2017 2018 Mean
SUZLON 4.14 3.72 3.93 2016 4.06 3.97 4.015
JPASSOCIATION 4.68 1.23 2.955 2016 0.7 1.56 1.13
GMR INFRA 8.64 142.8 75.72 2016 17.95 29.03 23.49
JPPOWER 16.9 12.77 14.84 2016 11.9 20.06 15.98
ANSAL INFRA 0.37 0.33 0.35 2016 0.29 0.25 0.27
SREI Infrastructure 0.53 0 0.265 2016 0 0 0
CG POWER 13.4 14.96 14.195 2016 6.34 12.03 9.185
IVRCLINFRALTD 21.5 18.64 20.08 2016 20.4 21.2 20.8
The results were as follows:

Result of t-test on ratios to check for statistical significance

Result P value
Return on equity / net worth 0.408
Operating profit ratio 0.777
Debt equity ratio 0.43
Current ratio 0.068
Inventory turnover ratio 0.304

It has been observed from the study. After applying T test. With comparison of 0.05
significance value. Considering 5 different ratio with corporate debt restructuring. Corporate
debt restructuring doesn’t have any effect on ratio of the company. The mean value was
considering before the corporate debt restructuring event and after corporate debt
restructuring mean value was considering. In all parameter define of above ratio, not a single
ratio was affected corporate debt restructuring.

 There is no difference of corporate debt restructuring and return on equity

 There is no difference of corporate debt restructuring and operating profit ratio
 There is no difference of corporate debt restructuring and Debt Equity Ratio
 There is no difference of corporate debt restructuring and current ratio
 There is no difference of corporate debt restructuring and current ratio
Conclusion and Recommendation
It has been concluded from the study that in recent time, for company required a capital faces
very difficult time. As bank loan and mortgage are a big issue. Even pledging of share is also
very big concern. Considering corporate debt restructuring might be the last step. This can be
attributed to the individual attitude of companies undergoing CDR as well as external
conditions. As the analysis shows, the ratios that are affected by CDR are the debt equity
ratios and the liquidity ratio, which do not have significant impact on the performance and
profitability of the company. The failure of cases being restructured can also be attributed to
other reasons, including unenforceability of ICA as CDR mechanism is non-statutory in
nature, delay in banks getting approvals from their respective boards and reluctance by the
private sector and foreign banks to join the mechanism. Due to the lack of/inadequate data in
the form of centralized database on clients, projects and industry, the restructuring proposals
often vary from the actual. However, CDR mechanism has not been a complete failure as it
has helped quite a few companies turn around, and requires changes with the dynamic and
competitive external environment. The Reserve Bank of India has an important role to play
by paying heed to the smaller banks’ concerns and therefore changing the present rules which
provide for approval by 75% creditors by value of a CDR package, which is binding on the
other creditors. RBI has framed new rules with respect to debt restructuring. For instance,
according to the new rules, promoters of the company have been asked to bring in more
equity to the company which will have to be deposited in a fresh escrow account till the
company is revived. Similarly. One very good recommendation can be given like do not
invest in those stock which opt for corporate debt restructuring.

References

 http://www.blog.sanasecurities.com/what-is-corporate-debt-restructuring-cdr/
 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/corporate-debt-restructuring.asp
 Roy Goode, PRINCIPLES OF CORPORATE INSOLVENCY LAW 481 (4th ed., 2011)
 http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/corporate-debt-restructuring-strategies-indian-
legal-regime-2/
 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/lanco-infratech-allots-shares-to-icici-
bank-under-cdr-package/article6735911.ece
 http://www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Finance/FINC086.htm
 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/corporate-debt-restructuring.asp
 https://ifrogs.org/PDF/CONF_2015/sl_Jain_Singh_Thomas_2015.pdf
 http://www.cdrindia.org/
 http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4568/10/10_chapter%203.pdf
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_restructuring
 https://www.rbi.org.in/upload/notification/pdfs/67158.pdf
 https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=440&Mode=0
 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7a82/782ad8f8cc5b738985a6219c952c15b7c0b3.pdf
 http://dsfinancials2013.blogspot.com/2013/09/cdr-corporate-debt-restructuring-with.html
 https://www.icsi.edu/portals/70/23112013S2.pdf
 https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finance/corporate-debt-
restructuring-291-accounts-for-rs-172463-crore-fail-5035239/
 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=302351
 www.researchgate.net/publication/
4840984_Financial_Distress_and_Bank_Restructuring_of_Small_to_Medium_Size_UK_
Companies
 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9a97/8667ed55d1b6622201dff51fc8729e4ab45c.pdf