Casagrand Premier Builder Limited - DRHP

THIS IS A PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT A PROSPECTUS ANNOUNCEMENT AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN INVITATION OR OFFER TO ACQUIRE, PURCHASE OR SUBSCRIBE TO SECURITIES. NOT FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY OUTSIDE INDIA. INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING OF EQUITY SHARES ON THE MAIN BOARD OF THE STOCK EXCHANGES IN COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER II OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (ISSUE OF CAPITAL AND DISCLOSURE REQUREMENTS) REGULATIONS, 2018, AS AMENDED. THIS ADDENDUM TO THE DRAFT RED HERRING PROSPECTUS DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 2024 (“DRHP”) IS NOT AN ADVERTISEMENT UNDER THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 2016 AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR INFORMING PERSONS ABOUT OUR REAL ESTATE PROJECTS OR TO INVITE ANY PERSON TO MAKE ADVANCES OR DEPOSITS IN RELATION TO ANY OF OUR REAL ESTATE PROJECTS (Please scan the QR code to view this Addendum) CASAGRAND PREMIER BUILDER LIMITED Our Company was incorporated on November 19, 2003, as a private limited company under the Companies Act, 1956, with the name “Casa Grande Private Limited” at Chennai, Tamil Nadu, pursuant to a certificate of incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu at Chennai (“RoC”). Thereafter, pursuant to resolutions of our Board and Shareholders dated June 23, 2017, and June 30, 2017, respectively, the name of our Company was changed to “Casagrand Builder Private Limited” and our Company received a fresh certificate of incorporation from the RoC on July 6, 2017. The name of our Company was subsequently changed to “Casagrand Premier Builder Private Limited” pursuant to resolutions of our Board and Shareholders dated June 13, 2023, and June 14, 2023, respectively, and our Company received a fresh certificate of incorporation from the RoC on June 30, 2023. Further, pursuant to the conversion of our Company to a public limited company and as approved by a resolution of our Board dated July 3, 2023 and our Shareholders pursuant to a special resolution dated July 3, 2023, the name of our Company was changed to “Casagrand Premier Builder Limited” and the RoC issued a fresh certificate of incorporation on August 11, 2023. For details of changes in our name and our Registered Office, see “History and Certain Corporate Matters – Brief History of our Company” and “History and Certain Corporate Matters – Changes in the Registered and Corporate Office” on page 269 of the DRHP. Corporate Identity Number: U70101TN2003PLC051989; Registered and Corporate Office: 5th Floor, NPL Devi, New No -111, Old No 59 L.B. Road, Thiruvanmiyur Chennai 600 041 Tamil Nadu, India; Contact Person: Nisha Abhishek Jha, Company Secretary and Compliance Officer; Tel: 044-45011724; E-mail: complianceofficer@casagrand.co.in; Website: www.casagrand.co.in NOTICE TO INVESTORS: ADDENDUM TO THE DRAFT RED HERRING PROSPECTUS DATED DECEMBER 2, 2025 (“ADDENDUM”) OUR PROMOTERS: ARUN MN AND CASAGRAND LUXOR PRIVATE LIMITED INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING OF UP TO [●] EQUITY SHARES OF FACE VALUE OF ₹2 EACH (“EQUITY SHARES”) OF CASAGRAND PREMIER BUILDER LIMITED (THE “COMPANY” OR THE “ISSUER”) FOR CASH AT A PRICE OF ₹[●] PER EQUITY SHARE (INCLUDING A SHARE PREMIUM OF ₹[●] PER EQUITY SHARE) (THE “OFFER PRICE”) AGGREGATING UP TO ₹11,000 MILLION COMPRISING A FRESH ISSUE OF UP TO [●] EQUITY SHARES BY OUR COMPANY AGGREGATING UP TO ₹10,000 MILLION (“FRESH ISSUE”) AND AN OFFER FOR SALE OF UP TO [●] EQUITY SHARES (THE “OFFERED SHARES”) AGGREGATING UP TO ₹1,000 MILLION (THE “OFFER FOR SALE”, AND TOGETHER WITH THE FRESH ISSUE, THE “OFFER”), COMPRISING [●] EQUITY SHARES BY ARUN MN AGGREGATING UP TO ₹500 MILLION AND [●] EQUITY SHARES BY CASAGRAND LUXOR PRIVATE LIMITED AGGREGATING UP TO ₹500 MILLION (COLLECTIVELY THE “SELLING SHAREHOLDERS”). This Addendum is in reference to the Draft Red Herring Prospectus filed with SEBI and the Stock Exchanges in relation to the Offer. In this regard, potential Bidders should note that pursuant to certain complaints received by us and/or the BRLMs, we propose to make the following modifications in the Draft Red Herring Prospectus by way of this Addendum: 1. Following the filing of the Draft Red Herring Prospectus, certain complaints have been made in relation to our Company, our Individual Promoter, certain of our Subsidiaries, our business and operations, and the Offer by certain parties, including buyers and prospective buyers of our projects (“Complaints”), to inter alia, SEBI and the BRLMs, as applicable. The key allegations in the Complaints include: (i) our Company is cheating homebuyers through unfair trade practices, is engaged in fraudulent activities in relation to the collection of GST, and that complaints have been filed with the Registrar of Companies and the Directorate General of GST Intelligence; (ii) our Company has had persistently poor and unresponsive customer relationship management services; (iii) our Company is currently under scrutiny by multiple enforcement agencies, particularly the Income Tax Department (“IT Department”), for serious financial and corporate law violations, including alleged unaccounted income of ₹ 6,000.00 million, and that illegal cash transactions of ₹ 40.00 million were unearthed through raids conducted at various locations linked to our Company by the IT Department; (iv) suo motu legal action has been taken against our Company by the Southern Bench of the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) for illegal construction within the Perumbakkam wetland,; (v) investigative authorities have discovered hidden real estate assets worth over ₹ 2,500.00 million, non-disclosure of key transactions in earlier regulatory filings, gross manipulation of project valuations, and the misleading use of shell entities, which suggest wilful misrepresentation and deception of regulatory bodies by our Company; (vi) our Company, in connection with its proposed real estate project in Dubai, is engaged in the illegal movement of funds through hawala channels, laundering proceeds of crime, and misappropriation of monies derived from black money linked to political figures associated with Congress and DMK, by enabling such persons to purchase apartments in our Company’s proposed real estate project in Dubai through third-party names; (vii) our Company is engaged in false and misleading advertising regarding the location of its project “Casagrand Majestica”; (viii) our Company has used grossly misleading marketing practices and false representations in promoting its residential projects, and writ petitions have been filed before the Madras High Court in relation to such allegations; (ix) our Company misrepresented its ownership and development rights over lands in Padappai (“Padappai Lands”), Chennai, in the DRHP by projecting control and ongoing development of approximately 3 million square feet, despite (a) having only entered into an MoU for the entirety of the Padappai Lands and having acquired only 20 acres (about 0.8 million square feet) from Vees Properties Limited (“Vees”) in 2022, and (b) the admission of Vees into the corporate insolvency resolution process under Sections 14 and 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and that it suppressed the existence of a mortgage over the 20 acres acquired; (xi) (a) our Company induced Vees to deposit original title deeds to the Padappai Lands and subsequently wrongfully pledged those deeds to Hero Fincorp Limited (“Hero Fincorp”), resulting in a fraudulent charge reflected in sub- registrar records, (b) failed to meet its payment obligations under the MoU and agreements for sale, (c) failed to disclose the CIRP proceedings against Vees, (d) and retained the original title deeds to a portion of the Padappai Lands that it did not own; and (d) acknowledge that any prior memorandum of understanding related to the Padappai Lands is subject to approval; that no response was provided by our Company; and further requested SEBI to take note of the moratorium on the Padappai Lands and direct our Company to revise the DRHP to remove references to the subject land and clarify the legal position; (xiii) our Company violated orders issued by RERA and the Supreme Court and suppressed litigations, including a complaint filed in the Thalambur Police Station; did not comply with certain status quo orders of the Madras High Court dated March 19, 2019 and the Supreme Court dated October 1, 2019; failed to disclose the same in the DRHP; and sold property to buyers in violation of certain court orders; (xiv) our Company misutilized public money in its residential project “Casagrand Elan”; and (xv) our Company has frequently violated statutory and environmental norms, including recently through an MoU that was stayed by the court. We have denied all allegations made in the Complaints and have responded to all Complaints received by us, the BRLMs, and complaints lodged on the SCORES portal thus far with relevant information and details, wherever applicable. In this regard, we propose to include an additional risk factor relating to the Complaints, as set out in this Addendum. 2. Additionally, the Complaints and the corresponding responses submitted by the Company or BRLMs, as applicable, shall be included in the “Material Contracts and Documents for Inspection” in the Red Herring Prospectus. The sections titled “Risk Factors” and “Material Contracts and Documents for Inspection” beginning on pages 34 and 774 respectively, of the Draft Red Herring Prospectus, shall be appropriately updated in the Red Herring Prospectus and the Prospectus to reflect the modifications indicated in this Addendum.This Addendum should be read in conjunction with the Draft Red Herring Prospectus. The information in this Addendum supplements and updates the information in the Draft Red Herring Prospectus. However, this Addendum does not purport to, nor does it, include all changes that have occurred from the date of filing of the Draft Red Herring Prospectus and the date of this Addendum, except to the extent of the modifications included in this Addendum. Please note that the information included in the Draft Red Herring Prospectus will be suitably updated, including to the extent updated by way of this Addendum, as may be applicable, in the Red Herring Prospectus and the Prospectus. Investors should not rely on the Draft Red Herring Prospectus or this Addendum for any investment decision, and should read the Red Herring Prospectus, as and when it is filed with the RoC, SEBI and the Stock Exchanges, before making an investment decision with respect to the Offer. This Addendum shall be available on the website of SEBI at www.sebi.gov.in, the website of Stock Exchanges at www.nseindia.com and www.bseindia.com, the website of our Company at https://casagrand.co.in/ and the websites of the Book Running Lead Managers, namely, JM Financial Limited, and Motilal Oswal Investment Advisors Limited at www.jmfl.com, and www.motilaloswalgroup.com, respectively. All capitalised terms used in this Addendum shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the meanings ascribed to them in the Draft Red Herring Prospectus. BOOK RUNNING LEAD MANAGERS REGISTRAR TO THE OFFER JM Financial Limited Motilal Oswal Investment Advisors Limited KFin Technologies Limited 7th Floor, Cnergy 10th Floor, Motilal Oswal Tower Selenium Tower B, Plot No. 31 and 32 Appasaheb Marathe Marg Rahimtullah Sayani Road Gachibowli, Financial District Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025 Opposite Parel ST Depot, Prabhadevi Nanakramguda, Serilingampally Maharashtra, India Mumbai 400 025 Hyderabad 500 032 Tel: +91 22 6630 3030 Maharashtra, India Telangana, India E-mail: casagrand.ipo@jmfl.com Tel: +91 22 7193 4380 Tel: +91 40 6716 2222 Website: www.jmfl.com E-mail: casagrand.ipo@motilaloswal.com E-mail: cpbl.ipo@kfintech.com Investor grievance e-mail: Website: www.motilaloswalgroup.com Website: www.kfintech.com grievance.ibd@jmfl.com Investor grievance e-mail: Investor grievance e-mail: Contact person: Prachee Dhuri moiaplredressal@motilaloswal.com einward.ris@kfintech.com SEBI Registration No: INM000010361 Contact person: Sankita Ajinkya / Subodh Mallya Contact person: M. Murali Krishna SEBI Registration No.: INM000011005 SEBI Registration No: INR000000221 BID/OFFER PROGRAMME ANCHOR [●] BID/OFFER OPENS [●] BID/OFFER [●] INVESTOR ON* CLOSES ON** BIDDING DATE* * Our Company may, in consultation with the BRLMs, consider participation by Anchor Investors, in accordance with the SEBI ICDR Regulations. The Anchor Investor Bidding Date, i.e., one Working Day prior to the Bid/Offer Opening Date. ** Our Company may, in consultation with the BRLMs, may decide to close the Bid/Offer Period for QIBs one Working Day prior to the Bid/Offer Closing Date, in accordance with the SEBI ICDR Regulations. The UPI mandate end time and date shall be at 5:00 p.m. on Bid/Offer Closing Date. Casagrand Premier Builder Limited is proposing, subject to applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, receipt of requisite approvals, market conditions and other considerations, to make an initial public offering of its Equity Shares and has filed the DRHP dated September 19, 2024, with SEBI and the Stock Exchanges. The DRHP is available on the website of SEBI at www.sebi.gov.in, as well as on the websites of the Stock Exchanges i.e. BSE and NSE at www.bseindia.com and www.nseindia.com, respectively, on the website of the Company at https://casagrand.co.in/; and on the websites of the Book Running Lead Managers (“BRLMs”), i.e. JM Financial Limited, and Motilal Oswal Investment Advisors Limited at www.jmfl.com, and www.motilaloswalgroup.com, respectively. Any potential investors should note that investment in equity shares involves a high degree of risk and for details relating to such risk, see ‘Risk Factors’ on page 34 of the DRHP filed with SEBI and the Stock Exchanges. Potential investors should not rely on the DRHP filed with SEBI and the Stock Exchanges and this Addendum for making any investment decision and should instead rely on the RHP, for making investment decision. The Equity Shares have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “U.S. Securities Act”) or any other applicable law of the United States and, unless so registered, may not be offered or sold within the United States except pursuant to an exemption from, or in a transaction not subject to, the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act and applicable state securities laws. Accordingly, the Equity Shares are being offered and sold outside the United States in “offshore transactions” as defined in and in compliance with Regulation S under the U.S. Securities Act and the applicable laws of the jurisdiction where those offers and sales occur. [Remainder of the page is left blank intentionally]TABLE OF CONTENTS RISK FACTORS .................................................................................................................................................. 2 DECLARATION ................................................................................................................................................ 19 1RISK FACTORS The following additional risk factor shall be added in the “Risk Factors” section beginning on page 34 of the DRHP as follows: Post the filing of the Draft Red Herring Prospectus, certain complaints have been made against our Company, our Individual Promoter and certain of our Subsidiaries by certain parties to, inter alia, SEBI, and the BRLMs as applicable. Such complaints may adversely affect our reputation, business and would require us to incur expenditure in defending such legal claims. There is no assurance that there will not be further complaints against our Company and our Subsidiaries which might divert the time, attention and resources of our management. Post the filing of the Draft Red Herring Prospectus with SEBI and the Stock Exchanges on September 19, 2024, certain complaints have been made against our Company, our Individual Promoter and certain of our Subsidiaries in relation to our business and operations and the Offer (“Complaints”). Certain of these Complaints are from buyers and prospective buyers of our projects. Our Company has denied the allegations under such Complaints addressed to us and responded accordingly. The table below sets out the details of the Complaints, including the allegations raised in the Complaints, the responses sent and their status: [Remainder of the page is left blank intentionally] 2Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* 1. Complaint from October 3, 2024 Allegations: Responded to the Ramkumar received complaint. on September 24, • The complainant claimed to be an aggrieved homebuyer and had filed complaints with the 2024. Registrar of Companies, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (“DGGI”), and other government departments alleging fraudulent activities by our Company, particularly in relation to GST collection. • He further asserted that his complaint with the GST Department is being actively considered and that the issue affects over 500 home buyers in certain project. • He also accused our Company of cheating lakhs of homebuyers through unfair and unethical trade practices and warned that allowing our Company to go public would harm investors. Response: • Our Company responded that it had not received any notice, summons, or communication from the Registrar of Companies, DGGI, or any government department regarding the proceedings allegedly initiated by the complainant in connection with alleged fraudulent activities or GST collection issues. It was also noted that no supporting documents were attached to the complaint, making it impossible to identify the specific matters referred to. • Our Company also clarified that all pending matters initiated by buyers and prospective buyers of units of completed and ongoing projects developed by our Company and our Subsidiaries, including but not limited to matters pertaining to refund of goods and services tax, have been disclosed in a consolidated manner in the DRHP under the section “Outstanding Litigation and Material Developments” in terms of the Materiality Policy. Further, it was clarified that these disputes are sub judice and subject to the decision of relevant authorities. • Our Company also stated that the allegations of cheating or unethical practices are false. 2. Complaint from January 16, 2025 Allegations: Responded to the Divya M received complaint. on January 2, 2025. • The complaint was from a customer who bought a flat in ‘Project Linore’ reporting persistently poor and unresponsive customer relationship management service affecting many buyers, causing distress and loss of trust in ability to provide basic support by our Company, and requested a resolution. Response: 3Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • Our Company responded that it prioritizes the need of customers including providing site visits, assigning dedicated customer relationship management agents, assisting with home loans, and conducting pre-handover inspections to address any issues. Further, our Company confirmed that we have implemented measures to address customer grievances, including, among others, a dedicated customer relationship manager for each customer, the ‘ICARE’ standard operating procedure for tracking and resolving complaints and defined turnaround times for resolution to ensure customer satisfaction including escalation (in case of unresolved or repeated complaints) within our customer relationship management team. • Regarding the specific issue alleged by the complainant, our Company stated that the complainant booked a unit in ‘Project Linore’ with an allocated covered car parking for which allotment letter and payment receipt was issued on October 30, 2024. On the complainant’s request dated November 23, 2024, this was changed to a tandem car parking, and a revised allotment letter and receipt were issued on November 28, 2024. A new CRM representative was assigned to the complainant on January 10, 2025. Our Company also confirmed that no complaint remained pending with customer relationship management for redressal as of the date of the response. 3. Received by the April 23, 2025, April 24, Allegations: Responded to the BRLMs on April 2025, May 5, 2025, May complaint. 16, 2025 with 14, 2025, and May 16, • The complaint alleged that our Company is currently under scrutiny by multiple enforcement further 2025 agencies, particularly the Income Tax Department, for serious financial and corporate law clarifications violations. It alleged the key findings from raids at over 40 locations linked to our Company sought on the matter across Tamil Nadu included unearthing of over ₹6,000.00 million unaccounted income, through emails detection of ₹40.00 million in illegal cash transactions, and evidence of benami properties and dated April 28, suspicious land deals; 2025, and May 7, 2025. • The complaint also alleged suo moto legal action by the Southern Bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) for illegal construction within the Perumbakkam wetland near Chennai, adjacent to the protected Pallikaranai Marshland Reserve Forest, and that the case is still pending before the NGT. • The complaint also alleges that these are not minor procedural lapses but serious violation of financial and corporate laws. • The complaint further stated that despite these investigations, our Company is moving forward with the Offer, including an Offer for Sale by its Promoters, raising serious concerns about regulatory ethics and failure of due diligence. 4Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • The complaint also alleged that the investigative authorities have also discovered hidden real estate assets worth over ₹2,500.00 million, non-disclosure of key transactions in earlier filings, and gross manipulation of project valuations, misleading use of shell entities and that this suggests wilful misrepresentation and deception of regulatory bodies, which is a direct violation of SEBI's disclosure norms and a serious breach of investor trust. Response: The allegations made by the complainant against our Company, Subsidiaries and Promoters were denied in their entirety. In addition, the following response was provided in respect of the allegations: • The search conducted by Income Tax Department at, inter alia, our Company’s and certain of its Subsidiaries’ premises in 2023 along with the outstanding tax proceedings involving our Company and certain of its Subsidiaries and the aggregate amount involved in these proceedings as on the date of the DRHP have been disclosed in the DRHP under the section “Risk Factors” and “Outstanding Litigation and Other Material Developments-Tax proceedings involving our Company, Subsidiaries, Promoters, and Directors” beginning on pages 40 and 703 of the DRHP, respectively and also as contingent liabilities in Restated Consolidated Financial Information, in compliance with the disclosure requirements under the SEBI ICDR Regulations. • The Restated Consolidated Financial Information in the DRHP records “The Group do not have any Benami property, where any proceeding has been initiated or pending against The Group for holding any Benami property”. Additionally, our Company stated that it and its Subsidiaries, have not received any notices and no orders have been passed against our Company and subsidiaries under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. • Further, it was subsequent to DRHP filing, that our Company and its Subsidiaries received show cause notices from the Income Tax Department for assessment years 2017–18, 2020–21, 2022– 23, and 2023–24 and the tax authorities passed assessment orders dated March, 2025 (“Assessment Orders”) reassessing our taxable income on several grounds including alleged unaccounted and under-reporting of income received in cash by our Company and Subsidiaries. • Our Company has disputed these reassessments and filed appeals in March-April 2025 before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) against the Assessment Orders (“Appeals”) on the grounds, inter alia, that the Assessing Officer had based its investigation on material seized from premises which do not belong to our Company or the Subsidiaries, the Assessment Orders considered selective information, disregarded relevant evidence and did not provide our Company and its Subsidiaries adequate opportunity to furnish explanations or respond to the discrepancies raised, and that these matters are currently sub- judice before various judicial forums. 5Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • Further, our Company and its Subsidiaries also stated that we have not received notices from any regulatory agencies like the directorate of enforcement, Reserve Bank of India, or any other similar authority in relation to any prospective or threatened regulatory action against our Company or Subsidiaries other than the ongoing direct and indirect tax related matters. The above mentioned matters are currently subjudice before various judicial forums. • It was also clarified that neither our Company nor our Promoters of the Company have ever been identified as a wilful defaulter or a fraudulent borrower and that the Promoters and Company are eligible to undertake the Offer. • The claim that investigative authorities have discovered (i) hidden real estate assets worth over ₹ 2,500.00 million, (ii) that our Company has not disclosed key transactions in earlier filings, (iii) that our Company has grossly manipulated project valuations, or (iv) that our Company has misleadingly used shell entities, were denied, and unsubstantiated and no evidence has been provided by the complainant to support these claims. • In relation to NGT proceedings, concerning an allegation that our Company had constructed a road across a marshland located within protected area in Tamil Nadu, it was responded that the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (“CMDA”) had filed reports before the NGT stating that the planning permission issued to our Company does not come within the marsh land as notified in the CMDA’s second master plan and that the subject area is a patta land located in the primary residential use zone of the CMDA’s second master plan. Additionally, it was also clarified that the district collector has also submitted a written statement dated September 22, 2023 before the NGT post inspection of fields and verification of documents indicating that the marshland owned by the forest department does not get encroached. It was stated that this matter as on response date was sub-judice before the NGT and has been disclosed in the DRHP under “Legal and Other Information – Outstanding Litigation and Other Material Developments- Litigation involving our Company - Litigation filed against our Company - Actions by regulatory and statutory authorities” on page 693 of the DRHP and it was submitted that our Company has not made any wilful misrepresentations to, omissions or deception of any regulatory bodies. • Following the initial response, SEBI sought additional information and confirmations vide their emails dated April 28, 2025, May 7, 2025 regarding, inter-alia, the names and locations of all entities and premises searched, particulars of documents and cash seized, point-wise confirmations/denials to allegations regarding unaccounted income, detection of illegal cash transactions, details of benami properties or suspicious land dealings, a detailed break-up of reassessed income for our Company and each subsidiary, the proposed utilization of Offer proceeds in relation to subsidiaries subject to tax proceedings, and the relationship/designation 6Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* of individuals whose premises were searched vis-à-vis our Company, its Subsidiaries, Promoters, and Promoter Group. All the requisite information and confirmations were duly furnished to SEBI including names and location of the entities and premises on which the search was conducted by Income Tax Department, details of documents seized which were in the nature of laptops, phones, servers, hard disks, pen drives, emails, cloud data, physical documents, WhatsApp messages and cash. Point wise confirmations/denials to allegations regarding unaccounted income were also provided to SEBI, and that our Company has appealed certain assessment orders. It was also submitted that the assessment orders issued by the Assessing Officers against our Company and certain Subsidiaries did not allege that we owned any benami properties or that they had suspicious land dealings. Further, details of relationship/designation of individuals whose premises were searched vis-à-vis our Company, its Subsidiaries, Promoters, and Promoter Group were provided to SEBI. 4. Received by the May 27, 2025 Allegations: Responded to the BRLMs on May 20, complaint. 2025. The complaint alleges that our Company, in connection with its proposed real estate project in Dubai, is engaged in illegal movement of funds through hawala channels, laundering proceeds of crime, and misappropriation of monies derived from black money linked to political figures associated with Congress and DMK. According to the complaint, these criminal funds have been routed through illegal hawala channels, laundered abroad, and then reintroduced into India as legitimate business capital, thereby obscuring their illicit origins and evading regulatory detection and scrutiny. The complaint further contends that the Dubai project is not a bona fide commercial undertaking, but rather a fraudulent attempt designed to launder large sums of black money and conceal the source of illicit transfers, including by enabling apartments to be purchased through third-party names by persons connected to political parties. In addition, the complaint asserts that despite being heavily indebted, our Company is proceeding with the Dubai project raising questions about the source of funds, and that the project is being used as a vehicle to securing capital and to escape mounting financial obligations and avoid completing existing projects. In addition to above, SEBI requested further information, including: (i) whether any action, such as an inspection, investigation, inquiry, or similar proceeding, has been taken or initiated by any regulatory, statutory, enforcement, or judicial authority in India or abroad in relation to the allegations raised; and (ii) comprehensive details of the Dubai project, including its financing structure and whether any portion of the Offer proceeds is proposed to be utilized for the project. Response: The following response was provided in respect of the allegations: 7Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • The allegations made against our Company were categorically denied in its entirety. It was stated that the complainant has not furnished any evidence in support of the allegations raised and has made general statements to malign the reputation of our Company. • It was clarified that the financial statements of our Company and its Subsidiaries are regularly audited as per applicable laws by independent statutory auditors, and the audit reports issued by the auditors in the last three Fiscals have not included any remarks in relation to the allegations. • The assertion that the Dubai real estate project is a fraudulent scheme intended to launder black money or obscure the origins of illicit funds was also categorically denied by our Company. There is no evidence to support the claim that political figures are purchasing property through third parties to reintroduce tainted money into India, nor is there any attempt to manipulate financial transactions to evade detection. The Restated Consolidated Financial Information as of and for the financial years ended March 31, 2024, March 31, 2023 and March 31, 2022, included in the DRHP, which has been examined by the Statutory Auditors includes a disclosure that the Group has not received any fund from any person(s) or entity(ies), including foreign entities (Funding Party) with the understanding (whether recorded in writing or otherwise) that The Group shall (a) directly or indirectly lend or invest in other persons or entities identified in any manner whatsoever by or on behalf of the Funding Party (Ultimate Beneficiaries) or (b) provide any guarantee, security or the like on behalf of the Ultimate Beneficiaries. • It was also submitted that that our Company has not commenced construction of the proposed project in Dubai as of the date of the response. Thus, the allegation made by the complainant is baseless without any supporting facts or documentation. • The allegation that our Company is using the Dubai project to secure capital to escape financial obligations or avoid completing existing projects was denied by our Company. Details with respect to the financial indebtedness of our Company (on a consolidated basis), is disclosed in the section titled “Financial Indebtedness” beginning on page 644 of the DRHP. The said section also sets out details of all the lenders of our Company and its Subsidiaries during the financial years ended March 31, 2024, March 31, 2023 and March 31, 2022 and the three months ended June 30, 2024. Further, it was clarified that our Company and its Subsidiaries have not defaulted in payment of any borrowings in the three Fiscals preceding the DRHP and the said disclosure has also been included in the section titled “Financial Indebtedness” on page 656 of the DRHP. • Further, it was responded that details with respect to the financial performance of our Company in the financial years ended March 31, 2024, March 31, 2023 and March 31, 2022 is disclosed in the DRHP including the Restated Consolidated Financial Information and other sections such as “Summary Financial Information” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of 8Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, on pages 91 and 659 of the DRHP. It was also noted that as set out in the Restated Consolidated Financial Information and several other sections in the DRHP, the net worth of our Company is positive as of March 31, 2024 and the interest coverage ratio is 1.76 times in Fiscal 2024. • Lastly, in relation to the Dubai project referred to in the complaint, it was stated that adequate disclosures were already included in the DRHP in several sections highlighting the plans of our Company/its subsidiaries, to set up project(s) in Dubai including risk factor 7 on page 42, risk factor 9 on page 44, and the sections “Industry Overview” and “Our Business” on page 249 of the DRHP. • Further, all additional information sought by SEBI was duly provided. It was confirmed that that no action (inspection, investigation, inquiry, etc.) has been taken or initiated by any authority (regulatory, statutory, enforcement, judicial, etc.) in India or abroad with respect to the allegations made in the complaint. Further, all requisite details of our Company’s wholly owned subsidiary in Dubai, namely Casagrand Gallantee Real Estate LLC, was provided, including the arrangement for acquisition of land in Dubai. It was also confirmed that no construction activity has been initiated in relation to Dubai project, no financing arrangement has currently been entered into for the said project. It was also submitted that as already set out in the section "Objects of the Offer" on page 122 of the DRHP, the Net Proceeds are proposed to be utilized for prepayment or repayment, in full or in part, of all or a portion of certain outstanding borrowings availed by our Company and certain of its Subsidiaries from financial institutions, which does not include any borrowings availed by Casagrand Gallantee Real Estate LLC. 5. Received from July 22, 2025 Allegations: Responded to the Kanchana Ranjan. complaint. The complainant alleges that our Company is engaged in false and misleading advertising for its Received by the project ‘Casagrand Majestica’ by promoting it as located in Guindy, a prime area of Chennai, when BRLMs on July 11, the project is actually in Manapakkam, approximately 9 kilometers away. The complaint states that 2025. promotional materials on social media and other media channels repeatedly referenced Guindy. The Tamil Nadu RERA (TNRERA) found that this misrepresentation violated Section 7(1)(A)(iii) and constituted unfair trade practice under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and imposed penalties and our Company was directed to remove misleading content. Further, the complainant requests SEBI to consider withholding approval for the Offer in light of the alleged misconduct. Response: The following response was provided in respect of the complaint: 9Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • Our Company denied the allegation that it had made a deliberate attempt to mislead homebuyers, claiming the incorrect location in advertisements was inadvertent. Upon realizing the error, our Company withdrew the incorrect advertisement and subsequently submitted a rectified advertisement before the TN RERA, with respect to Project Casagrand Majestica being situated at Manapakkam. • Our Company acknowledged the TNRERA order dated May 19, 2025, and reiterated that such error in the advertisement was inadvertent and without any deliberate intention to defraud prospective buyers or misrepresent the location of the project to entice customers and mislead the public. • Our Company also confirmed that DRHP correctly stated the project’s location as Manapakkam. 6. Received from August 8, 2025 Allegations: Responded to the Ravikumar Kannan, complaint. Alexander M, • The complainants had filed writ petitions before the Madras High Court alleging gross Kirubanantham and misleading marketing practices and false representations by our Company in promoting its V. Kamalakannan. housing projects, and the complaint was further to the order dated June 30, 2025 of the Madras High Court. Further Madras High Court directed competent authority to consider the Received by the representation of the complaints dated May 10, 2025 in relation to the above-mentioned BRLMs on July 30, allegations. 2025. • The complainants requested SEBI to withhold and suspend further processing of the Offer until the adjudication in the said matter is concluded, take cognizance of the misleading nature of the advertisements, brochures and online campaigns, and to ensure no public funds are mobilized through the Offer. Response: The following response was provided in respect of the allegations: • It was stated that the Madras High Court, vide orders dated June 30, 2025, in relation to the writ petition filed by the complainants directed the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (“TNRERA”) to consider the complainants’ representations dated May 10, 2025 after giving our Company an opportunity to present its case, and the writ petition filed by the complainants were dismissed by the Madras High Court on such terms. • In this regard, TNRERA issued notices to our Company on June 13, 2025; our Company submitted responses on June 30, 2025, addressing the issues of misleading details with respect to travel times from certain of their projects in related advertisements issued by our Company . 10Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* Since the submission of such replies, our Company has not received any further communication from TNRERA. • Our Company denied all allegations in the complaint and affirmed that no misrepresentation has been made in the DRHP regarding its business or operations, and confirmed that our Company has duly complied with the disclosure requirements prescribed by SEBI including the SEBI ICDR Regulations. 7. Complaint 1 September 25, 2025 – Complaint 1 Responded to the received from Gigi Response to Complaint 1 complaint George, (Director, (Gigi George) Allegations: Vees Properties Limited) on September 29, 2025 – • Our Company was alleged to have misrepresented its ownership and development rights September 13, 2025 Response to Complaint 2 over the Padappai lands in the DRHP by projecting control and ongoing development of (Ashish Vyas) approximately 3 million square feet, despite having acquired only 20 acres (about 0.8 Complaint 2 million square feet) from Vees Properties in 2022, and thereby misleading investors about received from September 30, 2025 – ownership, and control. Ashish Vyas, Response to Complaint 3 Authorised (Ashish Vyas) • Our Company was also alleged to have suppressed the existence of a mortgage over the 20 Representative of acres it purchased thereby creating the false impression in the DRHP that the land was held DiMax October 3, 2025 – with clear and unencumbered title. It was also alleged that our Company induced Vees Restructuring Pvt. Response to SEBI Properties to deposit original title deeds and then wrongfully pledged those deeds to Hero Ltd. (Interim Fincorp, resulting in a fraudulent charge reflected in sub-registrar records. It was also Resolution contested that our Company continued representing ownership over lands belonging to Professional for Vees Properties in the DRHP despite admission of Vees Properties into CIRP and Vees Properties provisions under Sections 14 and 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Limited) on complainant also urged SEBI to, among others, investigate our Company for fraud and September 10, 2025 misrepresentation and withhold approval for the Offer until corrective disclosures are made. Complaint 3 received from Responses: Ashish Vyas on September 15, 2025 The following response was provided in respect of the allegations: Received by Misrepresentation of MoU and ownership: BRLMs on September 23, 2025 • Our Company denied in entirety the allegations regarding misrepresentation of MoU and ownership of the land parcel in Padappai, Chennai in the DRHP. It was responded that Casagrand Exotia Private Limited (“Casagrand Exotia”), a Subsidiary of our Company, entered into an MoU with Vees Properties Limited (“Vees”) and Kgeyes Residency Private 11Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* Limited for the purchase and joint development of a larger land parcel (“Land Parcel”). Pursuant to this arrangement, Casagrand Exotia has purchased 20 acres 48 cents and executed an agreement of sale (the “Agreement of Sale”) for an additional 14 acres 9 cents. Further, pursuant to an amendment to such MOU, among others, our Company agreed to purchase 94 acres and 20 cents from Vees. • Further, it was stated that Company has disclosed on pages 44 and 248 of the DRHP that, as of May 31, 2024, the Company had only entered into agreements to sell/MoUs to acquire certain land parcels, including at Padappai (Chennai) of land area of 3.07 million sq. ft., and that title had not transferred and/or only part of the consideration had been paid. Such disclosures in the DRHP were based on the then‑subsisting MoU and related agreements at the time of filing of the DRHP. Our Company has also specifically disclosed that ₹596.22 million was unpaid for the Land Parcel at Padappai, Chennai as on May 31, 2024. Accordingly, there is no misrepresentation in the DRHP, and disclosures are not misleading as they were based on the factual position as on May 31, 2024. The allegation of wrongful inclusion of the land parcel at Padappai, Chennai in the DRHP to create a false impression of ownership or control was therefore denied. • It was also clarified that after filing the DRHP, Vees failed to satisfy the conditions precedent in relation to the acquisition of the land pursuant to the MOU and the Agreement of Sale (the “Balance Land Parcels”) and consequently, Casagrand Exotia was unable to conclude the purchase of the Balance Land Parcels and title to Balance Land Parcels has not been transferred to Casagrand Exotia, and thus balance consideration remains unpaid. It was also stated that the Company had paid the advance payment/security deposits as required to be paid in terms of the MoU and its amended agreement and Agreement of Sale and its addendum entered by Vees with Casagrand Exotia. In this regard, it was also responded that Risk Factor 9 titled, “We have entered into MOUs/ agreement to sale to acquire land or economic interests in land, for which we have made certain advance payments. Non-compliance with such agreements or our inability to pay the balance land acquisition consideration may impair our ability to complete the acquisition of such land parcels,” on page 44 of the DRHP, discloses the associated risks in relation to acquisition of such parcels of land and that the Company typically makes partial or advance payments to landowners and pays the remainder only upon successful completion of due diligence. • Accordingly, it was confirmed that DRHP contains disclosures regarding the status of title, consideration paid/pending, and contractual arrangements, including associated risks in relation to the Land Parcel in Padappai, Chennai, as of the date of the DRHP, and the allegation of fraudulent misrepresentation and misleading statements in the DRHP was denied. 12Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • Our Company also categorically rejected the allegation that Vees was driven into insolvency due to conduct by Casagrand Exotia. It was responded that such proceedings were not initiated by us, and our Company categorically rejected all assertion of abuse of dominance and conduct in bad faith by the Company in the complaint. Encumbrance suppressed – mortgage of 20 acres: • The allegation that our Company failed to meet its payment obligations for the purchase of 20 acres and 48 cents from Vees was denied. Pursuant to the sale deeds dated May 30, 2022, Casagrand Exotia purchased 20 acres and 48 cents covered under the MoU from Vees through three sale deeds, for valid consideration. Vees acknowledged receipt of the consideration in those sale deeds. No balance consideration is payable with respect to such sale deeds. • The allegation of suppression of encumbrances over 20 acres and 48 cents at Padappai, Chennai in the DRHP was also denied. The Company filed the DRHP on September 19, 2024. On January 29, 2025, after the filing of the DRHP, Casagrand Exotia, who purchased the 20 acres and 48 cents land parcel at Padappai, Chennai from Vees, mortgaged the property to Brios Finvest India Limited, and discharged the mortgage on July 16, 2025.This land parcel was subsequently mortgaged with Catalyst Trusteeship Limited (Trustee of Hero FinCorp Limited) on July 21, 2025, and that mortgage remains in force. Accordingly, there was no suppression of information in the DRHP. Fraudulent misuse of title deeds: • The alleged fraudulent misuse of title deeds by the Company was also denied in its entirety. As indicated above, Casagrand Exotia purchased 20 acres and 48 cents covered under the MoU from Vees through three sale deeds each dated May 30, 2022, for valid consideration and only such parcel of land owned by Casagrand Exotia have been mortgaged. No title deeds relating to land not owned by Casagrand Exotia have been pledged or encumbered with any lender. CIRP status ignored: • The allegation that our Company has failed to mention the CIRP proceedings relating to Vees in the DRHP, or that the Company has attempted to exclude and misrepresent this in the DRHP was rejected. It was stated that neither the Company nor Casagrand Exotia is a 13Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* party to the CIRP proceedings. Further, as of the DRHP date, Vees was not a subsidiary, a promoter group entity, a group company, or otherwise related to the Casagrand group. NCLT order records the agreement with the Company and consequences of misrepresentation: • Our Company stated that there was no misrepresentation or untrue statement made by the Company in the DRHP in relation to the allegations addressed above and the disclosure was in compliance with SEBI ICDR Regulations, SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations 2003 and applicable law. Complaint 2 Allegations: The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) for Vees Properties Limited noted that the DRHP references ongoing development of approximately 3.07 million sq. ft. on certain land at Padappai, Chennai which was subject to ongoing CIRP. It was further informed that on September 10, 2025, the IRP directed our Company to: (i) return the original title deeds of the subject land within seven days; (ii) immediately notify SEBI of the moratorium; (iii) confirm whether the subject land was used as collateral for a Hero Fincorp loan; and (iv) acknowledge that any prior memorandum of understanding related to the subject land is subject to approval, and that no response was provided by our Company. The IRP requested SEBI to take note of the moratorium on subject land and direct our Company to revise the DRHP to remove references to the subject land and clarify the legal position. Responses: The following response was provided in respect of the allegations: • With respect to returning of title deeds, it was stated that Casagrand Exotia has already purchased 20 acres 48 cents of land from Vees and also entered into an Agreement of Sale for an additional 14 acres 9 cents of land. Except the title documents for 14 acres 9 cents which was mutually handed over by Vees to ensure its obligations under the Agreement of Sale, Casagrand Exotia is not in possession of any other title deeds for the property owned by Vees. • Further, it was acknowledged that the MoU and its amended agreement and Agreement of Sale and its addendum entered by Vees with Casagrand Exotia is subject matter of the CIRP and the Company undertakes to comply with the orders of the NCLT in the CIRP. 14Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • On intimation to SEBI of the moratorium with respect to Vees, it was confirmed that the disclosure included in the DRHP with respect to land area at Padappai, Chennai is based on the MoU and related agreements at the time of DRHP filing, and any required updates will be made in the red herring prospectus and prospectus; a separate intimation to SEBI from the Company is not warranted in respect of the moratorium. • In response to the confirmation sought as to whether any land belonging to the corporate debtor was used as collateral for the loan availed from Hero Fincorp Limited, it was responded that apart from the 20 acres and 48 cents purchased by Casagrand Exotia from Vees, no other land forming part of the arrangement with Vees has been pledged or mortgaged by the Company. Complaint 3 The allegations in Complaint 3 largely mirrored those of Complaint 2; accordingly, our Company reiterated its response to Complaint 2 and has separately responded to Complaint 3. 8. Received by the October 27, 2025 Allegations: Responded to the BRLMs on October complaint 23, 2025 The complaint alleged the below against our Company: • Violation of orders issued by RERA and Supreme Court and suppression of litigations in the DRHP (such CSR number 168/2022 filed in Thalambur Police Station against the Company for cheating 475+ buyers and not providing registration till data due to hiding patta blockade and selling the property resulting into endangering around Rs 1400 million public money given by banks in the form of loans to the buyers) • Non-compliance with certain status quo orders of the Madras High Court dated March 19, 2019 and Supreme Court dated October 1, 2019 and non-disclosure of the same in the offer document. • Selling of property to buyers in violation of certain court orders. • Misutilization of public money in Project Casagrand Elan. • Frequent violations of statutory and environmental norms by the Company, done recently through an MoU, which was stayed by the court. Responses: 15Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • Our Company denied the alleged violation of RERA or Supreme Court orders. Further, it was stated that the CSR complaint at Thalambur Police Station was reviewed and not pursued, and that currently there are no outstanding criminal proceedings against the Company in relation to the CSR filed with the police station and accordingly such matter has not been disclosed in the DRHP in accordance with SEBI ICDR Regulations. • Further, it was stated that the order of status quo dated March 19, 2019 was issued by the Madras High Court (“Status Quo Order”) in a writ petition filed by certain persons (“Petitioners”) against inter alia our Company and the Government of Tamil Nadu pertaining to patta of certain lands in Thalambur village, Tamil Nadu and the said Status Quo Order was vacated by way of an order dated September 25, 2019 by the Madras High Court pursuant to which the writ petition against our Company and others was disposed-off (“HC Order”). In relation to the HC order, the Petitioners filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court of India, and on October 21, 2019 an order of status quo to be maintained by the parties was passed by the Supreme Court of India. Relevant disclosures in relation to the matter, including the order dated September 25, 2019 by the Madras High Court and subsequent special leave petition filed by the Petitioners before the Supreme Court of India and order dated October 21, 2019 therein, have been included in the section “Outstanding Litigation and Other Material Developments – Litigation involving our Company – A. Litigation against our Company – iii. Other pending litigations (sr. no. 1)” and “Outstanding Litigation and Other Material Developments – Litigation involving our Company – B. Litigation filed by our Company – ii. Other pending litigations (sr. no. 1)” on pages 694 and 695, respectively, of the DRHP, in accordance with the SEBI ICDR Regulations. Further, no adverse orders have been passed against our Company for violation of the status quo orders in the aforementioned proceedings before the Supreme Court of India and the Madras High Court. • The allegation that our Company has sold properties to innocent buyers in violation of court orders was denied by our Company. There are no adverse orders passed against our Company for selling property to buyers in violation of the status quo orders dated October 21, 2019 and March 19, 2019 passed by the Supreme Court of India and the Madras High Court, respectively. • The allegation that our Company has mis-utilized public money was denied. Further, it was stated that relevant disclosures in relation to ongoing litigations by the buyers and prospective buyers of completed and ongoing projects have been included in the section “Outstanding Litigation and Other Material Developments- Outstanding litigation initiated by buyers and prospective buyers of units of completed and ongoing projects developed by our Company and our Subsidiaries” beginning on 701 of the DRHP, in terms of the SEBI ICDR Regulations. 16Sr. Particulars of Date of response by Key allegations and responses Status of the Complaints No. Complaint Company/BRLMs* • In respect of the MoU referred to in the complaint, it was responded that after filing of the DRHP, certain Subsidiaries of the Company, namely, Casa Grande Civil Engineering Private Limited and Grace Gated Community LLP (the “Developer Subsidiaries”), entered into a memorandum of understanding dated July 17, 2025 (“MoU”) with Casagrand Smart Town Buyer & Owners & Association (“Association”) outlining the terms of maintenance, indemnity, support from Association regarding patta restoration and noting settlement of disputes filed by inter alia the Association against the Developer Subsidiaries. An internal dispute arose within the Association, and a member of the Association (“Petitioner”) filed a suit against the Association and the Developer Subsidiaries dated July 23, 2025, subsequent to filing of the DRHP, seeking to declare the MoU null and void before the Mahila Court at Chengalpattu. Our Company is not a party to this dispute. The Petitioner also filed an interim application before the Mahila Court at Chengalpattu, wherein an adjournment order dated July 25, 2025 was passed by the court (“Adjournment Order”). Accordingly, the Petitioner filed a civil revision petition before the Madras High Court against the said Adjournment Order seeking an interim injunction against the Association and the Developer Subsidiaries acting in furtherance of the MoU, and an interim stay order dated July 30, 2025 was passed by the Madras High Court. The matter is currently pending. *In certain instances where the Complaint(s) were not addressed to our Company, the BRLMs provided a response to SEBI in relation to such Complaint(s) pursuant to information provided by our Company, Subsidiaries, and Individual Promoter. 17The Complaints and the corresponding responses by the Company or BRLMs, as applicable, are included in the “Material Contracts and Documents for Inspection” on page [●] of the Red Herring Prospectus, for public inspection. While we have denied allegations levied under such Complaints addressed to us and responded accordingly, we cannot assure you that no further complaints will be raised, on the same subject matters or other matters, or that such complainants will not seek to initiate legal action(s) against us. Any legal action initiated by any of the complainants may have an adverse impact on our reputation, business, would require us to incur expenditure in defending such legal claim and may divert the time, resources and attention of the management of our Company and may also have an impact on the Offer. 18DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY Arun MN (Chairman and Managing Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 19DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY CG Sathish (Executive Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 20DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY Sumanth Krishna Raghunathan (Whole-time Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 21DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY Raju Venkatraman (Independent Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: Chennai 22DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY K V Ganesh (Independent Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: Bengaluru 23DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OUR COMPANY Rohini Manian (Independent Director) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: Chennai 24DECLARATION I hereby certify and declare that all relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the Government of India, or the regulations, rules or guidelines issued by SEBI, established under Section 3 of the SEBI Act, as the case may be, have been complied with and no statement, disclosure or undertaking, made in this Addendum is contrary to the provisions of the Companies Act, the SCRA, the SCRR, the SEBI Act or the rules, regulations and guidelines issued thereunder, each as amended, as the case may be. I further certify that all the disclosures, undertakings and statements in this Addendum are true and correct. SIGNED BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF OUR COMPANY N Sivasankar Reddy (Chief Financial Officer) Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 25DECLARATION BY ARUN MN AS A PROMOTER SELLING SHAREHOLDER I, Arun MN, hereby certify that all statements, disclosures and undertakings made or confirmed by me about myself or in relation to the Equity Shares offered by me through the Offer for Sale in this Addendum, are true and correct. I, in my capacity as Selling Shareholder, assume no responsibility for any other statements, including any of the statements made by or relating to the Company or any other Selling Shareholder in this Addendum. Arun MN Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 26DECLARATION BY CASAGRAND LUXOR PRIVATE LIMITED AS A PROMOTER SELLING SHAREHOLDER Casagrand Luxor Private Limited hereby certifies that all statements, disclosures and undertakings made or confirmed by it in this Addendum about it or in relation to the Equity Shares offered by it in the Offer for Sale in this Addendum, are true and correct. Casagrand Luxor Private Limited, in its capacity as Selling Shareholder assumes no responsibility for any other statements, including any of the statements made by or relating to the Company or any other Selling Shareholder in this Addendum. For and on behalf of Casagrand Luxor Private Limited Name: Arun MN Director Date: December 2, 2025 Place: London 27