Due Diligence for Lenders & Developers (portfolio/bulk)

A bank, an NBFC, or a developer does not need fifteen narrative reports that bury the defect. They need a repeatable scope, a common risk scale, and a clear list of conditions.

We agree the depth per asset before work starts. A portfolio is not an excuse to make each review shallow. Valuation, technical certification, and the lender’s own legal sign-off remain with the professionals instructed for those roles. Our work is the title, charge, approval, and litigation review described in the scope.

Laws and records vary by state. Khata, mutation, jamabandi, patta, and municipal extracts are not interchangeable, and the office that holds them changes with the city. The points below describe the work in general. The papers we ask for follow the property’s location, and the report names the source that was actually consulted.

What this covers

• Security-level title and charge review, including releases required before a new charge
• Searches of security-interest registries where they are available for that asset
• For developers: land assembly, conversion, access, and whether the parcels actually adjoin
• A common template so assets in one portfolio can be compared
• Conditions precedent written as a list, not a paragraph

Documents we typically need

• The asset list, with identifiers and the limit of each security
• Deeds, existing charge documents, and prior legal reports if you want them reconciled
• For land assembly: revenue extracts and conversion papers for every survey number
• The internal questions your credit or land committee already asks

What you receive

• An asset-wise summary an officer can read in a few minutes
• The longer working paper behind any amber or red item
• A list of conditions, documents still missing, and searches not done
• A format your counsel can adopt, without us presenting it as their opinion

Common red flags

• A portfolio priced as if every asset were a simple flat, when the list includes ancestral land
• Prior “clear” opinions that do not name the searches done
• Adjacent survey numbers that do not form one contiguous site
• A charge that cannot be released because the original lender’s papers are incomplete
• A deadline that cannot survive the registries involved

Questions on this check