Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. A very warm welcome to the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited's Q1 FY 2027 Earnings Conference Call. From the senior management we have with us today, Mr. Sanjeev Mantri, MD and CEO of the company, Mr. Gopal Balachandran, CFO, Mr. Anand Singhi, Chief - Corporate, International, Banca (KRG) and Government Business. Mr. Girish Nayak, Chief - Enterprise AI and Technology, Mr. Sandeep Goradia, Chief - Retail, Business Strategy and Solutions Team, Mr. Gaurav Arora, Chief - Commercial Lines and Motor (Underwriting and Claims), Mr. Girish Sehgal, Chief - Health UW and Claims, Customer Service and Operations. Please note that any statements or comments made in today's call that may look like forward-looking statements are based on information presently available to the management and do not constitute an indication of any future performance, as future involves risks and uncertainties which could cause results to differ materially from the current views being expressed. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during this conference, please signal an operator by pressing star5 then zero on your touchtone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Sanjeev Mantri, MD and CEO, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thank you. Good evening to each one of you. Thank you for joining the earnings conference call of ICICI Lombard for quarter one 2027. I would like to commence with an overview of the economic and industry trends, which have shaped the operating environment over the past few months, coupled with the insights on our company performance and our key initiatives. Following that, our Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Gopal Balachandran, will take you through the company's financial performance for the period ended quarter one 2027. The domestic economic momentum remains steady, with real GDP expanding by 7.8% year-on-year in quarter four of 2026 and 7.7% for 2026, supported primarily by private consumption and fixed investment, in spite of a challenging global environment. Moving into quarter one 2027, high-frequency indicators point to a sustained economic momentum despite geopolitical and trade-related uncertainties. Consumption remained resilient, reflected by growth in passenger vehicle sales, aided by GST-led affordability gains. Higher spending ability after a healthy harvest season and conducive financial conditions. GST collections remained healthy, while advanced tax collections recorded strong double-digit growth, indicating continued momentum in economic activity. India has recorded the highest ever first quarter retail sale of INR 7.8 million, which is indicative of our favorable demand factors. Furthermore, as per Vahan data, passenger vehicle registration increased by 21.3% year-on-year, two-wheeler registration grew by 13.8%, and commercial vehicle reported a growth of 14.1%. Rural markets remained strong, with tractors also witnessing healthy demand, reporting a growth of 21.8%. Bank credit growth remained strong during the quarter, with overall credit expanding in mid-teens on a YoY basis. The latest available sectoral data indicate broad-based financing demand with credit to large corporates improving and MSME loans also growing at over 20%. Services sector's growth was supported by strong lending to NBFCs, commercial real estate, and trade while vehicle loans also recorded healthy growth. These trends point to a sustained momentum across business investment, financial intermediation, and household demand. India's sound macroeconomic fundamentals and resilient domestic financial system provide buffers against external shock. However, the impact of El Niño conditions on the monsoon and continuing geopolitical tensions are a risk which may influence growth momentum. I will now talk about a recent judgment delivered on June 11th, 2026, by the Honorable Supreme Court of India, which has recognized the economic value of unpaid domestic work performed by homemakers while determining the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. This judgment provides for compensation under a distinct head, loss of domestic care, based on monthly income of INR 30,000, with a periodic increase to reflect inflation and socioeconomic changes. Based on a preliminary assessment of the impact of this judgment, the Motor TP loss ratio of the industry is expected to increase in the range of 12%-15%. Given the significance of the judgment impacting Motor TP portfolio of the industry, an upward revision of Motor TP premium rates becomes both necessary and urgent in order to restore premium adequacy. That being said, the General Insurance Council has also filed a revision petition seeking review of the order. Keeping with our prudent and conservative reserving practices, the company has made an assessment of the impact of the judgment on motor TP portfolio and has made the requisite provisions in the financials of quarter one 2027. Gopal will cover the specifics when he speaks on the financials later. Let me now dwell upon the industry performance for the quarter ending June 30th, 2026. The general insurance industry reported a gross GDPI growth of 10.9% for the period quarter one 2027. Speaking of specific segments within the industry, the commercial segment reported a degrowth of 8.6% in first quarter of 2027, driven by significant pricing pressure, particularly in fire insurance business. As we had indicated during our last investor call, the April renewal cycle witnessed exceptional competitive pricing, with rate reductions being the sharpest at the beginning of the quarter. This resulted in the overall degrowth of 27.8% in the fire line of business during the referred period of quarter one 2027. While the competitive intensity remained elevated for June 2026, the overall degrowth was 22.5% in the fire line of business, better than the preceding month in quarter one. As articulated in my opening remarks, the motor segment has seen good tailwinds since September 2025. The growth for the segment stood at healthy 13.9% for quarter one 2027, vis-à-vis 8.7% in quarter one 2026 and 10% in quarter four 2026. Health continues to be the fastest-growing segment for the GI industry and has contributed 47.3% of the overall general insurance premium for quarter one 2027, supported by greater awareness of health risk, protection needs, expanding distribution, and continued product innovation. The health segment reported robust growth of 20.1% for quarter one 2027. Within health insurance, the group health line of business grew by 14% for quarter one 2027, while retail health recorded growth of 31.6%. Speaking on the underwriting performance of the industry, overall, the combined ratio of the industry deteriorated to 117.8% for financial year 2026 from 112.6% for financial year 2025. ICICI Lombard combined ratio stood at 103.4% for the financial year 2026, as against 102.8% for financial year 2025, demonstrating a gap of over 14 percentage points between the combined ratio of ICICI Lombard in comparison to that of the industry's. I would particularly like to highlight the resilience of our motor insurance portfolio. The industry continued to operate in an intensely competitive environment during financial year 2026, placing significant pressure on underwriting profitability. Consequently, the industry combined ratio for the motor segment deteriorated to 128.0% in financial year 2026 from 123.7% in financial year 2025. Against this backdrop, ICICI Lombard motor combined ratio moved marginally to 106.6% in financial year 2026 from 105.3% in financial year 2025, reflecting the strength of our underwriting and portfolio management capabilities. Importantly, we maintained our market leadership during the year without compromising our underwriting quality. As a result, the differential between the industry combined ratio and ours widened to 21.4% in financial year 2026 from 18.4% in financial year 2025. Furthermore, an aspect which is noteworthy from a long-term perspective is that we have looked at the period since COVID, and this differential outperformance between the industry and ICICI Lombard combined ratio for motor insurance stood at 10.3% in financial year 2020, which has further widened to 21.4% in financial year 2026. This sustained outperformance reflects the effectiveness of our risk selection, pricing, and claims management practices and reinforces the strength of our operating model. I will now proceed to present our company's performance across key business segments in quarter one of 2027. The company reported a growth of 7.5% in GDPI for quarter one 2027, compared to the industry growth of 10.9% for the same period. Within our commercial line segment, we have maintained a disciplined and calibrated approach, focusing our growth exclusively on segments which align with our core risk management principles. Due to the extreme level of competitive intensity, we witnessed a degrowth of 13.8% for the period ending quarter one 2027 in this segment. While we continue to manage our large corporate portfolio through adequate risk governance, we have increased our focus on the SME and commercial line segment and by leveraging our distribution scale. Consequent to this, our proportion of SME business in commercial line of segment has increased to 33.6% in quarter one of 2027 against 28.4% in quarter one of 2026. We have leadership position in engineering and marine cargo line of business for quarter one 2027. In the motor segment, we grew in line with the industry at 14%, thereby maintaining a market leadership position with a market share of 10.5%. Our growth in new vehicle sales at 33.6% on a unit basis significantly outperformed the industry growth, which was at 14.9%. Our portfolio mix for private car, two-wheeler, and commercial vehicle stood at 49.8%, 28.7%, and 21.5%, respectively, for quarter one 2027. In the health segment for quarter one 2027, we grew by 24.9%, as against the industry growth of 20.1%. Our health business continued to demonstrate strong growth of 69.5% for quarter one 2027, significantly outpacing the industry growth of 31.6% for quarter one 2027. Consequently, our market share has improved to 4.5% in quarter one 2027 from 3.5% in quarter one 2026. I am pleased to share that our contribution for long-term book in new retail health business continues to gain traction and stood at 53.4% for quarter one 2027, vis-à-vis 31.8% for quarter one 2026. The group health segment recorded a growth of 16.3% for quarter one 2027, with our market share being 10.3% for quarter one 2027 compared to 10.1% for quarter one 2026. Our commitment to profitable growth has been consistent over the years. Although market dynamics may affect results in certain quarters, we remain well-positioned to manage cyclical fluctuations and deliver long-term value. Our One IL One Team philosophy continues to foster collaboration and operational excellence, enabling a unified approach across the organization. As a part of this philosophy, I would now apprise you of certain key initiatives. Our IL TakeCare app, a one-stop solution for insurance and wellness needs, achieved 22.1 million downloads as on June 30, 2026, reflecting growing customer engagement and digital adoption. The gross written premium earned from IL TakeCare app during the period quarter one 2027 was INR 154.3 million as compared to INR 932 million in quarter one of 2026. There has also been a more than 50% year-over-year increase in lead originating from this platform. The total number of health and travel claims serviced through IL TakeCare app witnessed an uptick by approximately 20% and reached 168,521 claims for quarter one 2027, vis-à-vis 141,000 claims for quarter one 2026. We continue to improve our efficiency levels in motor claims. Our preferred partner network serviced 75.6% of our non-OEM claims for quarter one 2027, vis-à-vis 74.6% in quarter one 2026. The sustained increase reflects our continued focus on channeling claims through digital to high-quality network partners and deepening network effectiveness. Our NPS score for motor claims remained consistent at 69 for financial year 2026. I would also like to highlight that as a part of our effort to leverage India's digital public infrastructure, ICICI Lombard has started using the use of account aggregator framework in our claims management process. In the health segment, 99% of our total claims were paid within 30 days for quarter one 2027. For financial year 2026, we recorded an NPS of 73 for health claims, demonstrating strong satisfaction levels and reinforcing our position as a customer-centric organization. IL Sahayak has further strengthened our on-ground claim support for our health customers, with our customer coverage improving over the previous years. As a part of their feedback in quarter one 2027, 93% of our customers surveyed rated their experience as exemplary, which is 4.5 on a scale of five, highlighting the support provided during claims processing and assistance with hospital coordination. The number of customers assisted through the IL Sahayak initiative stood approximately at 30,000 for quarter one 2027. In quarter one 2027, we marked the continued progress in our transformation towards unified digital first service model under One IL, One Call Center vision. Our focus remains on delivering seamless, intuitive, and scalable customer experiences while improving operational efficiency through technology-led servicing. Customer engagement remained robust during the quarter, with a clear acceleration in digital adoption. Digital interaction reached 624,000 quarter one 2027 compared to 214,000 in the corresponding period last year, increasing digital contribution from 36% in quarter one 2026 to 69% in quarter one 2027 during the same quarter, and further improving to 71% in June of 2026. This significant shift reflects growing customer preferences for self-service and conversational channels while also reducing dependence on traditional servicing models. Our differentiated service initiatives, which we had spoken about in a previous earnings call, have resulted in increase of our call center NPS to 76 in quarter one from 60 in quarter one FY 2026. I will now request Gopal to take through the financial numbers of quarter one 2027. Thanks, Sanjeev, and good evening to each one of you. I will now give you a brief overview of the financial performance of the recently concluded quarter. We have uploaded the results presentation on our website. You can access it as we walk you through the performance numbers. With effect from October 1, 2024, the long-term products are accounted on a 1/n basis and rated by IRDAI. All numbers therefore mentioned are on a 1/n basis unless stated otherwise. Please also refer to our investor presentation for further details. GDPI of the company was at INR 83.18 billion in Q1 FY 2027, compared to INR 77.35 billion in Q1 FY 2026, a growth of 7.5% as against the industry growth of 10.9%. On an n basis, GDPI of the company grew by 8.5% for Q1 FY 2026 as against an industry growth of 10.7%. Our GDPI growth during the quarter was primarily driven by growth in retail loans. Combined ratio stood at 107.2% in Q1 FY 2027 compared to 102.9% in Q1 FY 2026. On an n basis, the combined ratio stood at 106.1% in Q1 FY 2027 compared to 102.2% in Q1 FY 2026. During the quarter, we have incurred two large losses under the fire segment, which impacted our net to the tune of INR 0.63 billion, that's INR 63 crore, impacting the combined ratio by 1%. As articulated by Sanjeev in his opening remarks on the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court, which impacted the Motor Third-Party portfolio, we have considered an impact of INR 1.65 billion in our claim reserves. This again has had an additional impact on our reported combined ratio of 2.8%. Excluding the impact of the large losses and the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court, the combined ratio for quarter one FY 2027 stood at 102.3% as against 102.2% for Q1 FY 2026. Investment income was INR 11.74 billion in Q1 FY 2027 as against INR 12.88 billion in Q1 FY 2026. Our capital gain net of impairment on investment assets stood at INR 1.83 billion in Q1 FY 2027 compared to INR 3.8 billion in Q1 FY 2026. On the investment side, during the quarter, the overall debt portfolio yield increased to 7.58%. That's up from 7.46% at end of last financial year in the FY 2026. The portfolio duration equally increased to 5.53 years. That's up from 5.13 years at March 31st, 2026. Profit before tax de-grew by 46.1% to INR 5.36 billion in Q1 FY 2027 compared to INR 9.94 billion in Q1 FY 2026. Consequently, PAT de-grew by 46% to INR. INR 4.03 billion in Q1 FY 2027 compared to INR 7.47 billion in Q1 FY 2026. Excluding the impact of the two large losses in the fire segment and the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court on the Motor Third-Party portfolio, the PAT de-grew by 23% and stood at INR 5.75 billion in Q1 FY 2027. Return on average equity was at 9.6% in Q1 FY 2027 compared to 20.5% in Q1 FY 2026. Return on average equity, excluding the couple of impacts that I spoke, was 13.6%. Solvency ratio was at a healthy 2.71x at June 30, 2026, as against 2.67 x at March 31, 2026, which again continues to be significantly higher than the regulatory minimum of 1.5 x. As I conclude, I would like to reassure that we remain focused on our strategy of driving profitable growth and sustainable value creation for all our stakeholders while ensuring that the interest of the industry and our policyholders is at the forefront. Thank you. Shall we proceed with the question and answer session? Yes, please. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin with the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to please use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. Our first question comes from the line of Sanketh Godha with Avendus Spark. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thank you for the opportunity. My first question is on this TP reserve itself. This INR INR 165 crore what you provided is only for the business what you have done in 1Q. Which means this INR 165 crore kind of a number, if you do the same amount of business every quarter, will be a repeat number. Just want a clarification on that side. Given the judgment is retrospective, for the bad book, did you provide anything with respect to this Supreme Court judgment, or you think your IBNR is good enough to take care of that amount? Yeah, thanks, Sanketh. Before I answer on this specific, let me just put this in context. Yeah. I think when you look at Motor Third-Party as a book, as what we have always been saying, has been a book which obviously exhibits a long tail of claims development over years. Of course, we have also seen that this part of the portfolio typically gets influenced by what you get to see as judgments coming in from courts at different points of time. This is right through the years since we all have been in operations. Over years, I think we have obviously seen various judgments coming in from time to time, which has possibly laid down what should be the norms so far as settlement of Motor Third-Party claims liability is concerned. Therefore, to that extent, any judgment coming in from, in this case, the Supreme Court of India, I think we have seen also in the past when some of these judgments have come at different points of time, way back, if I remember it, going back to, let's say, 2008, 2009, and very recently since we listed, some of you may recollect, we also had couple of Supreme Court judgments coming through in 2021, more so in quarter four of that year. Even at that point of time, I think what we have largely done is, which we have again spoken about our reserving approach. In general, I think what we generally factor in is to be prudent and conservative whenever such events come to light, and that's the reason why we always say that Motor TP, in specific, always has to be looked at with the lens of conservatism in terms of reserving that you carry. That's also reflected if you see our specific reserving triangle disclosure outcomes in the context of Motor Third Party over years. In the light of that, I think pretty much similar thought process is what we have exhibited when you look at even for the quarter one, that's when we have seen this judgment coming through in the month of June. We have continued to follow prudence. We have continued to exhibit conservatism, insofar as the outcome of this judgment as we expect as a preliminary assessment at this point of time. As we also mentioned in the opening transcript, I think at this point of time, the General Insurance Council has also filed a revision petition against the judgment. Obviously, it is sub judice at this point of time. Obviously, we'll wait and see in terms of how the impact plays out. Therefore, to the first question of yours, in terms of how do we see the impact of this play through in the subsequent quarters, I think will also be influenced by, in terms of what do we see as an outcome of maybe the revision petition. That's one. Second, I think we have also been talking through, insofar as the entire industry is concerned, this is a market impacting event. Therefore, to that extent, I think we have also been talking about clear need for a revision in the motor third-party pricing. Hence, to that extent, I think obviously, this will suitably get represented through the industry body, and hence, which is why, again, we put that also as a part of the opening transcript to say that therefore there is clearly a need for a revision in third-party price change. Again, that's another factor in terms of how things will possibly play out when you look at the portfolio that you write for the future. The third, in general, when you look at not specific, again, in the context of this judgment alone, Sanketh, I think even otherwise, As we always have said that there is always ways through which you can always create efficiencies in managing the overall motor book, and that will be true even for the third-party portfolio as well. Hence, again, there is an element of variability that gets attached. Therefore, it will be too difficult for us to really say that whether nothing is going to happen insofar as the future quarters are concerned, and therefore, will you continue to see the same impact for the subsequent quarters. Since there is a lot of variability, that's the reason why we said we will wait for how some of these events play through, and obviously, to that extent, we will calibrate what it entails to your first point on the future impact of the judgment playing through. To the historic book, obviously, Sanketh, I think when we have called out, which is exactly what we keep saying. I think when we provide for reserves, that's the point that I made. Obviously, we build in for margin for uncertainties, and these margins are exactly for reasons for maybe events which may not be unknown at the time when we are providing for these reserving estimates. We have factored in, when we have provided for this, as I said, a prudent and conservative number at this point of time. This is a holistic assessment of the exposures that we have till 30th of June. This call for a conservative claim is also INR 1.65 billion in our numbers in Q1. If I may also add, see, this verdict has come on June 10th. We're barely a month down. Really very early days, but it's come from the highest court, and we have to respect the judgment whichever way it comes. Gopal briefly spoke about the fact that we have been subjected to multiple judgments. If you look back in time in terms of history from 2009, there was a Sarla Verma case which redefined the future prospect of salaried class. In 2012, there was Santosh Devi. National Insurance came in 2017. Then in the recent past, which you just referred to, there was Satinder Kaur, which came in 2020, and also in 2021, Kirti case came in. There have been multiple cases which have come in the past which has redefined it. Past book as things stand. We're very confident in terms of saying that our reserving philosophy is holding us good. There is no impact. It is only the source of quarter one that we have taken. I would also be candid enough to admit that the factors which Gopal has just covered, this is purely on prudency as well as on a conservative basis, and this is the way we have always conducted ourselves as a motor. In particular, this time, we spoke about why we have been able to do what we are on motor and what has been In summation, our performance is that is the market. If there is a risk evident, it's important that we call it out. While that is there, we are also equally equipped to manage it, and a multiplication of INR 1.65 billion into the next three quarters would be unfair. We will have to wait for the situation as it evolves. We also will keep you all abreast of what it is. Sir, for example, General Insurance Council loses on review petition, and hypothetically assume there is no price hike for the next three quarters. Then is it fair to say that if you conduct the same quality of business that you conducted in 1Q, then this INR 165 crore is a more kind of specific number for every quarter? Sanketh, I would again just push this thing. The fact that, let's say, there is an element of variability attached, which is the reason why I called out each of those elements before kind of responding to your specific point. To be honest, honestly, we obviously had expected this to come from all of you. Hence, to that extent. That's the reason why we will have to play as it comes through, as what Sanjeev was saying, just a month back is when we have seen this judgment come out. We will also have to see in terms of how ground-level adoption of the order plays out. There are multiple variables which get attached insofar as the future quarters are concerned. And in which ways we'll be reaching out and obviously be talking to you in subsequent- Yeah. ... quarters as well. We will obviously keep giving updates in terms of where do we land. It's another significant development which we are apprising. Nothing more than that. We have taken that into the quarter one financials because it is prudent, and we have always been conservative. Beyond that, it will evolve. Trust me- Understood. ... industries combined is 128%, Sanketh. You know that there will be things which will intervene 110% to make it better than where it stands. If that is the case, then it will play out over time. I understand, sir. Lastly. Thank you. Yeah. Sanketh, sorry to interrupt. We request you to please rejoin the queue if you have any further questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Prayesh Jain with Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited. Please go ahead. Hi. Just clarifying this point again, what Sanketh was asking. The INR 165 crore reserve is only for the business written in Q1 or is for standing Motor business? Prayesh, just to again clarify, which is what I explained, I am just reiterating. We have done a holistic assessment of all the exposures that we have on the books as at June 30. This includes not only just the book that has been underwritten for quarter one. We have also looked at the book that we have underwritten even in terms of the exposures that we have for the past periods. I'm just reiterating, basis all of that from a prudence and conservatism standpoint, the quarter one financials has a claim reserve impact of INR 1.65 billion. Again, I would just reiterate, for us, this is exactly why this book requires industry to make sure that they are appropriately reserved. That's very critical. Otherwise, you could end up in situations as what we have seen, the reserving triangle disclosures for pretty much many players in the market possibly reflecting otherwise. Hence, it's very important, and particularly when some of events like this happens, you just have to make sure that you reflect the prudence and conservatism in your reserving approach that we have consistently followed. That's the reason why we also gave reference to some of our earlier instances. To that extent, these judgments coming in from courts, according to us, I don't think it's for us, I would say is something that we have seen regularly coming through over years. The approach and consistency with which we have dealt with it is what we have reflected. Even in the past, which is what I said, when such judgments came, we did a fair assessment of, let's say, what could be the potential implications at those respective times. I distinctly remember, since I called out post-listing in 2021, and all of you should actually go back to the transcript that exists. We had specifically called out to say that we have considered for the impact of those judgments in the period in which the judgments had come through. Hence, to that extent, it is pretty much on the similar lines as what we have done even now. Hypothetically, if in Q2 you don't have any price hike or any reversal of this, ideally the loss ratios will normalize, right? Is that a fair way to think? Which is what I responded to even Sanketh's point. I think at this point of time, I think these are just initial days. I think we will have to wait and see how some of these variables play out for the future. Then we will be able to come back and specifically speak or maybe start talking about what are we seeing as an update. Also, Prayesh, one way or the other, if this is what the new normal is, as you said, then the cost of acquisition also may change. It will redefine multiple things at multiple levels because at this juncture where the industry is, we decide it does not matter where Lombard is. There's already not much of elasticity, so even the behavior on ground will change. It will find its way, but what's already got canned, which is the quarter one, is what Gopal is referring to and talking about. Another one was, can it be simply absorbed, right, and nothing will happen and industry can be keeping it business as usual? We do believe that this deserves the attention a t multiple levels. We've gone ahead and taken this call. To think that nothing will be done on every single front and we do business as usual also would not be fair. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Prayesh. Yeah, just last one. Do you think? Sorry to interrupt, Prayesh. We request that you please rejoin the queue if you have any further questions. Thank you. Sure. Ladies and gentlemen, we request that you please restrict yourselves to two questions only. If you have any further questions, you may rejoin the queue. Our next question comes from the line of Madhukar with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. Just two questions. One, on this provisioning, because it is retrospective in nature, do you consider only sort of the open cases, or does this mean that even cases that were previously closed can be sort of reopened and you would be required to pay additional compensation? Second question is, if we were to exclude the two major fire loss incidents, what could be the loss ratio in the fire segment, and how much additional sort of loss ratio are we seeing on a normalized basis because of lower rates in fire are we seeing? Maybe I'll take in the reverse order first, because I think possibly we have tried to respond on the third party reserving, and I'll come back on that. On fire, Madhukar, so again, let me just put this in context. I think when you look at- There seems to be some crosstalk. Yeah, whoever is speaking maybe can put themself on mute. Thank you. Just on the large losses on the fire segment, let me put this in context. Again, this is not something that I'm speaking only for the first time. In general, I think if you look at our approach to writing commercial lines, has been to kind of look at underwriting profitable risk selection. That's been clearly the thought process, and that is also evident when you look at, I think when we have in that sense, when you looked at the overall book on commercial lines or even if you look at fire as a category, relative to the industry growth, I think, obviously we have kind of let go market shares. Oh, yeah. Having said that. All right. Maybe again, there seems to be some crosstalk. Once again, requesting whoever is speaking to possibly put themselves on mute. Thank you. Therefore, that's the thought process with which we have been kind of underwriting the overall commercial lines book. If you ask us, large losses, if you ask us, I think is something that kind of does come as a portion. You will reach Thakur Village, sir, it would be better if you can mute. Okay. All right. Let me continue. Hopefully this time around we will be able to complete it. The thought process is very clear in terms of what do we want to underwrite. Having said that, I think these were two large losses that impacted the book quite significantly, therefore, Madhukar, to answer your point on what could have been the loss ratio. The reason for calling it out is the reason why we kind of reflected on why we should be calling that out separately. That's the reason if you look at, in general, fire loss ratios for us historically. We have never seen a loss ratio in an exceedance of 100% +. That kind of speaks the impact possibly what these two large claims kind of led to, which is absolutely okay with us. I think that's the nature of the business that we are in. If you were to kind of exclude the two, the loss ratios will be pretty much in the range within which we have kind of historically operated at. If you go over years, again, the reason I'm not giving you a specific number is because any specific year can also get impacted by some of these events, or it could be impacted by a catastrophic loss. Which is why over years, when you look at fire as a line of business, generally the loss ratio range that we have operated is between 65%-70% on an average over years. That's the range. In some years it could be higher, some years it could be lower. That could be possibly the range within which you could possibly see the outcome play out. That's in response to your second one. On the first point, again, the reason why I put that in context on Motor Third-Party with reference to some of the earlier judgments, that is exactly what we also keep looking at as to what happens whenever some of these judgments do come from time to time. Does this impact open exposures or does that in that sense, have some bearing when it comes to, let's say, specific closed cases? In general, I think what we have observed is, since the matter has reached possibly a finality when it comes to closure versus court orders, I think those cases typically do not come up for a change. That's generally the experience is what we have seen. Therefore, to answer your point, it's largely confined to, as I said, some of the open exposures for us. Got it. Thank you. Thanks, and all the best. Thank you, Madhukar. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Rishi Jhunjhunwala with IIFL. Please go ahead. Yes, thanks for the opportunity. Again, going back on that Motor TP provision, I would like to just simply understand that if nothing changes For us from here on, right? Assuming everything else remains same. On an ongoing basis, the Motor TP loss ratios get extended or expanded by how many basis points? If nothing else changes, I understand that there are dynamics around possibly price hikes and other things as well, theoretically, how much it goes up by on an ongoing basis? Unfortunately, Rishi, that's the point, right? I think because there is a lot of variability, I think to be honest, to say that nothing will change also is something we don't think is likely to exist. There will definitely be actions on ground, which is the reason why I said this is an industry impacting event, and therefore collectively as an industry, we will obviously see as to what is it that can play through insofar as some of the future book is concerned. It will be a little unfair for us to give you, to say that nothing changes on ground when you look at Q2, Q3 or Q4. Our sense is whenever such events. Again, I will reflect back. I think obviously the industry has come together. The industry has made suitable representations, which is what is desired. Obviously then we have seen the outcome of it play through over periods. I think maybe we'll leave it there, and which is where I said, this is not just the end of the call that we do. We will obviously come back and every quarter in any which ways we will give an update in terms of where do we see things playing out. Sir, okay, I understand about the future thing, but say for 1 Q, for the business written in 1 Q, how much the extra loss ratio was accounted for? Because I guess you have done it for the retrospective effect, right? Which is what we have called out. I think the reason why I spoke about the approach to reserving being prudent and conservative in general over years, which is what we have followed. At all points of time, even in the past, we have always spoken about when we provide for an ultimate loss number or an ultimate loss ratio at the time when we write the risk, we always build an element of prudence. That prudence is effectively something that takes care of any uncertain events getting played out. Therefore, to answer your point, for the book, which could be the past book, this margin of safety that we build in, I think is sufficient enough for us to possibly absorb at this point of time a preliminary assessment of the impact of this judgment. Yeah. Hence, I think what we have largely considered is for the book that has been written in Q1, which entails that incremental claim reserves of INR 1.65. You know, I think Rishi, and for everyone else before this, Madhukar, Prayesh, Sanketh, who I put this question. Let me just give you one quick update in terms of the lay of the land. What is the construct of a motor book? Motor book typically, constructs of OD and TP. OD is at the industry level 40% and TP is 60%. If you see most players which are there would have a book which is heavily skewed towards third party, and the logic is very simple. OD is driven by high service requirement, and it really tests you because frequency in private car and all can go up to 25%, you're pretty much involved essentially. ICICI Lombard, while being also a leader, has a split of 50/50. Our market share and our growth has been driven by efficiencies on the Own Damage side in a big way, and third party is just about 50% of our book. If you split the book in that direction and see how ICICI Lombard can counter it on ground, there are multiple ways. We don't want to get into the details as yet because it is fair to say what Gopal said, that it is in a way to say this is what the event is, we are recognizing it, we are putting it across. Rest assured that there is no way industry will leave it where it is or ICICI Lombard will leave it where it is. That's not why we exist here, right? There is enough and more that will get done in course of time and also as the judgment settles in, review petition is part of it, TPI has been a regular plea. There are multiple things which are happening. It's a significant development, and we could have actually gone ahead with nothing and just spoken about it. But that wouldn't have meant much. We've gone ahead on a prudent basis, taken this call and put this right now as a mark of what it stands for. Our past book as things stand. Again, it's nebulous, but we are certain that can take the shock because of the math, which I think Sanketh spoke about when he spoke first in the call. This is where the math sits, and we do see it evolving in course of time. Understood, sir. Secondly, second question is- Sorry to interrupt, Rishi. We request you to please rejoin if you have any further questions. Absolutely. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Nidhesh from Investec. Please go ahead. Thanks for the opportunity. Sir, what is driving this intense competitive intensity in fire? Is it deregulation of pricing, which we've witnessed, I think 12-18 months back, or is it reinsurers pricing which is driving that? How do you see this competitive intensity in fire panning out, let's say from medium-term perspective? The current pricing is rational or you think that pricing will see a upward movement from a medium-term perspective. Similarly, on motor, we keep on saying that the combined ratio of industry is 120% + 128%, but industry continues to remain very, very aggressive. What will it take for them to become rational in terms of pricing on the motor side also? Let me again just put this in context. If you look at the ability of players to continue to lose on underwriting is purely a function of the extent to which they would want to continue to keep writing business growth. Just on that point, when you look at again from an overall industry standpoint, and this is basis public disclosures, if you look at the overall solvency of the industry as a whole, which used to be roughly at about 1.75 x at the end of March 2025, this number has come down to 1.56 at March 2026. Clearly, I think there is a significant drop in terms of use of capital exactly for the adverse movement in combined that the industry has experienced. If you look at again the combined for the overall industry as a whole across all segments put together, there has been an adverse change to the extent of 500 basis points, roughly about 112%-117%. Hence, the ability of players to continue to lose capital, in our sense, I don't think is something that can be sustained, and this is exactly what we had called out earlier. What we have seen, and which is again, all of you can see, this is again public disclosures. Some of the companies which went very aggressive, you can clearly see basis monthly numbers. They're starting to pull back, and that's again reflective in the month-over-month change. Hence, our view is that I don't think this is something that can be a sustaining one. More so with some of the earlier points that we spoke, the ability of the players to be able to absorb in the light of their ability to where they are on solvency, honestly, those players will have to recalibrate in terms of what do they want to do. On fire, in specific, unlike, let's say, the retail lines, fire is far more as we all know. It requires scale, it requires definitely solvency, more importantly, it also requires a great brand for to underwrite the risk. All of those factors is something that we have been able to have. This is something that we spoke even in the April call, as in to say, at this point of time, what we are seeing is clearly seeing a relative soft reinsurance renewals that played through for the whole industry as a whole. Hence, to that extent, there has been this competitive pressure. I'm sure you would have seen, Nidhesh, when you would have seen for quarter one, particularly on fire, the industry degrowth was about 27%. Vis-a-vis that, we degrew by about 32%. Just for the month of June, if you would have looked at, the industry degrowth was about 22%. We actually had a comeback. Our degrowth was only about 18%. This clearly speaks in terms of the momentum that we are possibly able to see coming back. That's also the reason why we also called out in some of the economic activity indicators that are being seen. I think we are seeing a lot of positive green shoots play out. Hence, whether we will see a similar kind of a price aggression for the rest of the year, honestly, we don't think the same level of price aggression will subsist. Having said that, Q1 is obviously a very big quarter when you look at the commercial lines and particularly for fire. Whether we will be able to see a full comeback of the degrowth for the rest of the year may not be so. Definitely what we are seeing is maybe a relative reduction to the extent of price aggression that one has seen in Q1. Sure. That's it from my side. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Rahil Shah with HSBC. Please go ahead. Hello. Thank you for the opportunity. Sir, two questions from my end. First on motor, how much TP hike can offset this pressure, assuming the government goes ahead with the price hike? How much hike can offset this impact? Second is on the health side, there has been increase in the loss ratio given in 1Q, we also had the GST benefit on the claims. What explains that? These are my two questions. Which is why we called out, I think the impact of this. All of you are aware, I think the industry has not seen a third-party price change since the last few years. Therefore that itself, as what we have been seeing as an industry, possibly requires a revision of pricing. Coupled with, let's say, the judgment, I think as what we called out, as a preliminary assessment, we think the industry gets impacted on its loss ratio by 12%-15%. When you put both of these together, that's the minimum in terms of what one would normally expect a price change to get affected at, and that's something that we would expect as an industry to play through. That's one. To your point on health loss ratios, I think that's purely a function of what we are again seeing in the overall market. Again, it is not something specific in the context of ICICI Lombard. Across the industry, what we have seen is normally some of these elevated claim incidences is something that we see in quarter two, because they're largely linked to, let's say, some of the monsoon-related stuff. In this, and some of you will possibly refresh. Even in Q1 last year, when you looked at the retail book, I think we actually had an elevated loss number. That was also contributed by, let's say, increased claim incidences. Even the same thing is what we have seen even in Q1 of this year, across the industry, a possible increase in the overall health claim incidences. Hence, that's something that we're keeping a watch on in terms of how things is likely to play out for the rest of the quarters. Okay. Just a follow-up. On the health front, I mean, 2Q, the loss ratio can increase from this level also? It's something that we'll have to wait and see. At this point of time, monsoons have not been as active as what you've normally seen in the initial month of July. Yeah. We will have to wait and see how that plays out. Maybe once we announce numbers in October is when we'll be able to tell you where do we see on the overall claim incidences for the industry. Okay. Sure. Thanks. Yeah. Our retail indemnity book has done pretty well because we have a very good new growth that is driving it, and we've been continuing to outstrip the market growth as far as the retail indemnity book is concerned. We're no one to predict the frequency per se because we can only work on a proactive basis with our customers and see what best can be done. We are very hopeful that it should get better in the progressive quarters. Sir, just on this comment. Given the growth was strong and still we are seeing increase in loss ratio. Once, say, the growth normalize, then the increase would be even sharper, right? No. One thing is, of course, on the health per se, the growth staying the course for last four or five years, we always thought it'll get moderate, but I don't see that playing out. There's a bulk of India which is still not insured. That growth part from our standpoint will stay and there are elements by which if at all it gets where it is, there are price which we can resort in terms of hike and economies of large scale can also play out with the growth. There are solutions to every single aspect of this. Not that we've been tied down. The regulator has been very supportive in terms of creating a conducive atmosphere. A lot of work is going on at multiple fronts with hospitals, common empanelment, and the industry itself is involved on all these initiatives in a very significant way. We would see the convergence of all of this playing out in ensuing quarters. I think on that, I just want to add to say that I think, which is what we also called out in our openings narrative as well. As in on ground, I think some of our initiatives that we're taking on from an ICICI Lombard standpoint on making sure that the experience for the customer at the time of claim is superior, I think is what we spoke on our IL Sahayak initiative. I think that has done very well. I think the customer feedback in terms of an ICICI Lombard person present on ground helping the customer, insofar as the claim experience, I think has been very positive. Those are the interventions that we would obviously do on ground whenever we see possibly slightly elevated incidences getting played out. To that extent, again, what Sanjeev said, I think again, there are factors which influence our ability to run the overall book. Thank you. We will now take one last question, which will be from the line of Avinash from Emkay Global. Please go ahead. Yeah, good evening. Thanks for the opportunity. A couple of questions. One factual, this around INR 78 crore arbitration panel award that has gone up, INR 78 + whatsoever interest. Is there some kind of a provision you have for that or will that charge come in Q2? I mean, how will that math work? The second would be, again, I'm going on motor. There was a recent interview of the chairman where he was categorical. He named the product like Motor TP, where there is no case for commissions. If that is the view, if anywhere he's taking, do you think that a TP hike, a tariff hike looks realistic because he's first saying that, okay, look, there's no case for a commission in Motor TP. So probably under commission, of course, today would be anywhere between 15%, 18%, 20% depending upon the different players. Related to that, this INR 165 crore prudential, of course, yours. Your reserving has been typically lot prudent. As a result, we have seen a very strong reserve release coming every year. Would be still some buffer and you have taken this now. Does this mean that, okay, despite those buffers you felt the need of this INR 165 crore? That means the reserve release probably going to moderate from here onwards or probably going to be absent, or you think that, okay, those typical reserve releases or the prudent reserving that has been released over years that remains separate and this INR 165 crore is just assessment for this. Thanks. Let me go in the same sequence as what you asked. I think honestly, maybe we could have covered as a part of this transcript on the arbitral award. Just this case, this is a filing that we did yesterday. I think if you would have seen the filing, this is not something that pertains to the latest periods. This is a policy that dates back almost about seven, eight years back. It is just that we have got an arbitral award at this point of time and obviously, I think there are legal defenses available for us in terms of remedies that is available, and to that extent, obviously, we will do that. That is one. To that extent, is this a finality to the award that has come through? The short answer is no. To that extent, we will explore the legal remedies available. That is one. Second, I think in terms of the impact, what has been awarded as a part of the tribunal judgment, obviously, I think, as I said, because this is not a new book, there are already existing reserves. Mind you, these are whatever award that has been put out is on the gross basis. As what we have always said, I think we also do have appropriate reinsurance protection, particularly for addressing some of these losses. This award on the overall net of P&L, we do not think it is going to be anything material. That is one. Second, on the point on Motor Third-Party and therefore correspondingly, could there be any factor on how the commission regulations could get affected at various segments? Honestly, I think we will wait for the regulator to possibly spell out as in terms of what their thought processes are, which is why even in the April call we did say that whichever form the regulator comes out with revised mandate, I think from an ICICI Lombard standpoint, we think they will be extremely positive. To that extent, I think we will wait for this regulation to come out before calling out as to what could be the potential impact of this. On the third part, I think, again, in context, there is no change in the thought process of our reserving philosophy. That is the reason why in each of these questions that were being asked, me and Sanjeev, I think we time and again emphasized on the importance of prudence and conservatism. That approach remains, and that is the reason why we have taken this claim reserve impact in quarter one numbers. Does that for any reason change any of our thought process on providing for margins, et c? The short answer is no. We should continue to exhibit. I think we will continue to follow prudence irrespective of whether it is Motor Third-Party portfolio or otherwise. As what we have seen over years, our reserving triangle should logically continue to exhibit a favorable loss development over cycles. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question for today. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Sanjeev Mantri for closing comments. Over to you, sir. Great. Thank you so much for joining in. For quite obvious reasons, we had bulk of it driven on a particular event, but frankly speaking, we are very excited as a company. India has sold maximum car in last quarter and that momentum is phenomenal. We see a bigger play for us as an entity on the motor side. India is actually buying lot more health insurance, which again is a big plus and that is where we have been a challenger. We see ourselves continue to stay invested and work along with all stakeholders to see how that business can keep growing. There is so much at play. There is some bit of competition visible in commercial, but nothing is new about it. We didn't talk about it, but the reinsurance part also has to some extent played, and there has been capacities which have been made available, consequent to which it's gone where it is. Anything which is superfluously way above the normal or way below will have a tendency to correct, and eventually efficiencies of the organization will drive where they are. That's what ICICI Lombard has been able to prove over submissions of quarters and years. My belief is that we are in a very good, exciting growth phase from a general insurance sector perspective, and we are well-placed to make it work for us. For any clarification. That concludes this conference. Thank you all for joining us. You may now disconnect your lines.