Você está na página 1de 30


Mr V.P. Jain

This project has come to fruition though the guidance of esteemed
guidance of my mentors Mr. V.P. Jain and Ms. Jyoti Sindhu. I express my special
thanks to them for their support in selection of the topic and their insightful
comments and suggestions on earlier drafts that were revised and improved under
their guidance.
I take this opportunity to thank my teachers who shared with me their valuable
This is an outcome of unparalleled infrastructural support that I have received from
the Sri Venkateswara College library staff and ICT Lab staff.
I deeply value your guidance.

2 | Page

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK..........................................................7
IMPACT OF M&AS.............................................................................14
CASE STUDY.......................................................................................21


3 | Page

An entrepreneur may grow its business either by internal expansion or by

external expansion. In case of internal expansion a firm grows gradually over time,
through acquisition of new assets, replacement of the technologically obsolete
equipments etc. But in external expansion, a firm acquires a running business and
grows overnight through corporate combinations. These combinations are often in
the form mergers, acquisitions, amalgamations and takeovers.

Mergers and

Acquisitions are now a critical part of the fabric of doing business and are deeply
ingrained in the business strategy world over.
The global financial services industry has also experienced merger waves
mainly due to severe competition which puts focus on economies of scale, cost
efficiency, and profitability and the too big to fail principle followed by the
authorities. This project aims to study the impact of M&As on the Indian banking
During the last two decades, the Indian banking sector has undergone a
metamorphic change following the economic reform process initiated by the
Government of India. The forces of globalization, deregulation and liberalization
unleashed by the economic reforms, set in motion in 1991, have transformed the
face of the Indian financial services sector landscape , including that of the Indian
banking sector in a big way. There has been a paradigm shift from a regulated to a
deregulated environment. The economic liberalization and deregulation measures
initiated in the 1990s have opened up the doors to foreign competition and made the
markets more efficient and competitive. Continuous innovation and keeping pace
with technological change have become a must for survival of the firms in the
financial services industry including the banking sector. The developments in the

4 | Page

Indian banking sector have witnessed quite a few mergers and acquisitions (M&A
The Narsimham Committee report in August 1991 highlighted the need for
financial sector reforms and fostering competitive spirit in the Indian banking
sector. In 1997, a second committee was set (under M. Narsimham) to specifically
suggested mergers among strong banks both in the public and private sectors. Since
the onset of reforms in 1990, according to RBI report, 22 bank amalgamations, have
taken place in India (up to 2007). While, the amalgamations of Indian banks were
mostly driven by weak financials, in the post 1999 period there have been mergers
between healthy banks prompted by business and commercial considerations.

The main objective of the project is to
1. Provide a clear understanding of the concepts of mergers and acquisitions
2. Analyze their impact on
Performance of business
3. Analyze the impact of bank mergers through a case study


5 | Page

Concept and Definition

A merger can be defined as the fusion or the absorption of one company by

another. It may also be understood as an arrangement; thereby the assets of two or

more companies get transferred to or come under the control of one company.
In common practice, in merger one of the two existing companies merges its
identity into another existing company or one or more existing companies may form
a new company and merge their identities into a new company by transferring their
business and undertakings including all assets and liabilities to the new company.
The shareholders of the company whose identity has been merged are then issued as
the shares in the capital of the company merged.
Amalgamation legal process by which two or more companies are joined
together to form a new entity or one or more companies are to be absorbed or
blended with another and as a consequence the amalgamating company loses its
existence and its shareholders become the shareholders of the new company or the
amalgamated company. The word amalgamation or merger is not defined anywhere
under the companies act 1956. However, [Section 2(1A)] of the Income Tax Act,
1961 defines amalgamation as follows:
Amalgamation, in relation to companies, means the merger of one or more
companies with another company or the merger of two or more companies to form
one company (the company or companies which so merge being referred to as the
amalgamating company or companies and the company with which they merge or
which is formed as a result of the merger, as the amalgamated company) in such a
manner that6 | Page


all the property of the amalgamating company or companies immediately

before the amalgamation becomes the property of the amalgamated company


by virtue of the amalgamation;

all the liabilities of the amalgamating company or companies immediately
before the amalgamation become the liabilities of the amalgamated company


by virtue of the amalgamation;

shareholders holding not less than three fourths in value of the shares in the
amalgamating company or companies(other than shares already held therein
immediately before the amalgamation by, or by a nominee for, the
amalgamated company or its subsidiary ) become shareholders of the
amalgamated company by virtue of the amalgamation, otherwise than as a
result of the acquisition of the property of one company by another company
pursuant to the purchase of such property by the other company or as a
result of the distribution of such property to the other company after the
winding up of the first mention company;

Otherwise, then as a result of acquisition of a property of one company by another

company pursuant to the purchase of property by another company or as a result of
distribution of such property to the other company after the winding up of the first
mentioned company.

An acquisition usually refers to a purchase of a smaller firm by a larger one.
Acquisition, also known as a takeover or a buyout, is the buying of one company by
another. Acquisitions or takeovers occur between the bidding company and the
7 | Page

target company. There may be either hostile or friendly takeovers. Acquisition in

general sense is acquiring the ownership in the property. In the context of business
combinations, an acquisition is the purchase by one company of a controlling
interest in the share capital, or the all or substantially all of the assets and/or
liabilities, of another company. A takeover may be friendly or hostile, depending on
the offeror companys approach, and may be affected through agreements between
the offeror and the majority shareholders, purchase of shares from the open market,
or by making an offer for acquisition of the offeree shares to the entire body of


The difference between Merger and Acquisitions is subtle. In case of a
merger, two firms, together, form a new company. After merger, the separately
owned companies become jointly owned and get a new single identity. When two
firms get merged, stocks of both the concerns are surrendered and new stocks in the
name of new merged company are issued. Generally, Mergers take place between
two companies of more or less of the same size. In these cases, the process is called
Merger of Equals.

But, in case of Acquisition, one firm takes over another and establishes
its power as the single owner. Here, generally, the firm which takes over is the
bigger and stronger one. The relatively less powerful smaller firm loses its existence
after Acquisition and the firm which takes over, runs the whole business by its own
8 | Page

identity, unlike Merger, in case of Acquisition, the stocks of the acquired firm are
not surrendered. The stocks of the firm that are bought by the public earlier
continue to be traded in the stock market. But, often mergers and Acquisitions
become synonymous, because in many cases, the big firm may buy out a relatively
less powerful one and thus compels the acquired firm to announce the process as a
Merger. Although, in reality an Acquisition takes place, the firms declare it as a
merger to avoid any negative impression.
Another difference between merger and Acquisition is that, when a deal
is made between two companies in friendly terms, it is proclaimed as Merger, even
in case of a buyout. But if it is an unfriendly deal, where the stronger firm swallows
the target firm, even when the target company is not willing to be purchased then it
is called an Acquisition.



9 | Page

Accelerating a companys growth particularly when its internal growth is

constrained due to paucity of resources, internal growth requires that a company
should develop its operating facilities- manufacturing, research, marketing, etc. But
lack or inadequacy of resources and time needed for internal development may
constrain a company's pace of growth. Hence, a company can acquire production
facilities as well as other resources from outside through mergers and acquisitions
to acquire requisite infrastructure and skills and grow quickly.
This may happen because of

Arise when increase in the volume of production leads to a reduction in cost
of production per unit. This is because, with merger, fixed costs are distributed over
a large volume of production causing the unit cost of production to decline.
Economies of scale may also arise from other indivisibilities such as production
facilities, management functions and management resources and systems. This is
because a given function, facility or resource is utilized for a large scale of
operations by the combined firm.

Arise because, a combination of two or more firms may result in cost
reduction due to operating economies. In other words, a combined firm may avoid
10 | P a g e

or reduce overlapping functions and consolidate its management functions such as

manufacturing, marketing, R&D and thus reduce operating costs. For example, a
combined firm may eliminate duplicate channels of distribution etc.

Implies a situation where the combined firm is more valuable than the sum
of the individual combining firms. It refers to benefits other than those related to
economies of scale. Operating economies are one form of synergy benefits. But
apart from operating economies, synergy may also arise from enhanced managerial
capabilities, creativity, innovativeness, R&D and market coverage capacity due to
the complementary resources and skills and a widened horizon of opportunities.

A profitable company can buy a loss making unit to use the targets tax write


Companies go for Merger and Acquisitions from the idea that, the joint
company will be able to generate more value than the separate firms. When a
company buys out another, it expects that the newly generated shareholder value
will be higher than the value of the sum of the share s of the two separate


11 | P a g e

Merger and Acquisition can prove to be really beneficial to the companies

when they are weathering through the tough times. If the company which is
suffering from various problems in the market and is not able to overcome the
difficulties, it can go for an acquisition deal. If a company, which has strong market
presence, buys out the weak firm, then a more competitive and cost efficient
company can be generated.

Literature Review

12 | P a g e

The following literature review covers both the global and domestic scenarios.
It highlights the impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on various aspects of the
banking business.
On the Performance of the firm
As stated earlier there are several reasons for the banks to merge their
operations, including realization of synergies: Financial, Operational (Porter, 1985)
and Managerial (Porter, 1987). The second reason is increased earnings and market
share. Merged banks may be in a stronger position to compete globally. They may
be able to provide a more diversified product mix to their clients at competitive
prices because of economies of scale and scope. They may access information and
proprietary technologies, achieve greater diversification and earnings stability, taxbenefits and even satisfy managements goals (Hubris) (Hawawini and Swary,
1990).Mergers may also result in reduced operating costs (Standard and Poors,
1997). Cybo-Ottone and Murgia (1996) analyzed 26 mergers of European
Financial Services firms (not just banks) taking place between the years 1988 and
1995 in thirteen European banking markets. Average abnormal returns of targets
were significantly positive and those of acquirers were essentially zero. CyboOttone and Murgias (2000) event study analysis of 54 mergers and acquisitions
covering 13 European banking markets of the EU and the Swiss market for the
period 1988 to 1997 found significant increase in value for the shareholders of
bidder and target banks at the time the deals were announced. . Manoj Anand and
Jagandeep Singh (2008) observed that the merger announcements in the Indian
banking industry had positive and significant shareholder wealth effect both for
bidder and target banks.
Bhattacharyya, Lovell & Sahay (1997) examined the productive efficiency of 70
Indian commercial banks between 1986 and 1991 and found that public sector
13 | P a g e

banks were the most efficient when compared to foreign-owned and privatelyowned Indian banks.
Contradicting the above literature, Berger and Humphrey (1992)
examined the mergers occurring in 1980s involving banks with a minimum asset
size of $1billion. They observed using frontier methodology that bank mergers led
to no significant gains in X-efficiency. They also analyzed return on assets (ROA)
and total costs to assets and reached similar conclusions. Akhavein, Berger and
Humphrey (1997) analyzed changes in profitability using the same data set based
on ROA and ROE measures and found no significant change in these ratios
following consolidation. Srinivasan and Wall (1992) investigated all commercial
and bank holding company mergers that occurred during the time period from 1982
to 1986.Their finding revealed that non-interest expenses had not come down in the
post-merger scenario. Stephen A Rhoades findings of the operating performance
studies (a sample of 19 bank mergers) were generally consistent. Almost all of these
studies found no improvement in efficiency or profitability following bank mergers,
the findings being robust both within and across studies and over time. Jagdish R.
Raiyani (2010) in her study investigated the extent to which mergers lead to
efficiency. The financial performance of the bank has been examined by analyzing
data relevant to the select indicators for five years before the merger and five years
after the merger. It is found that the private sector merged banks are dominating
over the public sector merged banks in profitability and liquidity but in case of
capital adequacy, the results are contrary. Further, it was observed that the private
sector merged banks performed well as compared to the public sector merged
banks. Rehana Kouser and Irum Saba (2011) explored the effects of merger on
profitability of the bank by using six different financial ratios. They have selected
10 commercial banks that faced M&A during the period from 1999 to 2010. The
lists of banks were selected from the Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE). Quantitative
14 | P a g e

data analysis techniques are used for inference. Analysis was done by using paired
t-test. The results recommend that operating financial performance of all
commercial banks M&A included in the sample from banking industry had
declined later. The results shows that there is a decline in all 6 ratios: profitability
ratios, return on net worth ratios, invested capital, and debt to equity ratios. Dr.
Neena Sinha et al (2010) in their study described the impact of mergers and
acquisitions on the financial efficiency of the selected financial institutions in India.
The analysis consists of two stages. Firstly, by using the ratio analysis approach,
they calculated the change in the position of the companies during the period 20002008. Secondly, they examined the changes in the efficiency of the companies
during the pre and post merger periods.The result revealed a significant change in
the earnings of the shareholders, however there was no significant change in
liquidity position of firms. The result of the study indicate that M&A cases in India
show a significant correlation between financial performance and the M&A deal, in
the long run, and the acquiring firms were able to generate value. Nisarg A. Joshi
and Jay M Desai

in their study measured the operating performance and

shareholder value of acquiring companies and comparing their performance before

and after the merger. They used Operating Profit Margin, Gross Operating Margin,
Net Profit Margin, Return on Capital Employed, Return on Net Worth, Debt-Equity
Ratio, and EPS P/E for studying the impact. They concluded that as in previous
studies, mergers do not improve performance at least in the immediate short term.
Pramod Mantravadi, A.Vidyadhar Reddy (2007) in their research paper, focused
on the impact of mergers on the relative size and operating performance of
acquiring corporate by examining some pre- and post-merger financial ratios with a
sample of firms chosen from all mergers involving public limited and traded
companies in India between 1991 and 2003. The study used the following financial
ratios: operating profit margin, gross profit margin, net profit margin, return on net
15 | P a g e

worth return on capital employed and debt-equity ratio .The results suggest that
there are minor variations in terms of the impact on operating performance
following mergers, when the acquiring and acquired firms are of different relative
sizes, as measured by market value of equity.
On Shareholders
It is often believed that the shareholders of the acquired company benefit the
most. The reason being, it is seen in the majority of the cases that the acquiring
company usually pays a little excess than it should or what is prevailing in the
market so as to compensate the shareholders who forgo their shares. Shareholders
of the acquiring firm, on the other hand are believed to be affected the most.
Literature, however has following conclusions. Dr. P. Natarajan and k.
Kalaichelvan (2011) used the share price data and financial statements of eight
select public and private sector banks, during the period between 1995 and 2004,
this study examined M&A as a business strategy and to identify the relative
importance of mergers on business performance and increased Shareholders wealth.
The study showed that mergers enhance performance and wealth for both the
businesses and shareholders. Manoj Anand and Jagandeep Singh (2008)
observed that the merger announcements in the Indian banking industry had
positive and significant shareholder wealth effect both for bidder and target banks.
On the contrary T T Ram Mohan (2005) observed, Mergers also do not
seem to result in improvements in cost efficiency; Not least mergers do not in
general enhance shareholder value : the target firm benefits but not the acquiring
firm, resulting in a zero or negative sum game. Often mergers result in gains not
because of enhanced size but because of diversification benefits. As PSBs are for
the most part have diversified portfolios additional gains from merger may not be
16 | P a g e

significant. Deo and Shah (2011), indicate that merger announcements in have no
significant impact on the bidder portfolio. M&A create significant positive
abnormal returns for target shareholders only. Selvam. M (2007) has analyzed the
implications of stock price reactions to mergers and acquisitions and concluded that
the share prices are market sensitive and not dependent on mergers.
On Employees
In the process of consolidation of corporate sector human resource is also
considered to be vital and sensitive issue. The UNI Europe estimated that around
13000 jobs have been lost in 10 years as a result of merger and acquisition
process. It is well known fact that whenever there is a merger or an acquisition,
there are bound to be lay- offs. In the event when a new resulting company is
efficient business wise, it would require less number of people to perform the
same task. Under such circumstances, the company would attempt to downsize
the labor force. Even though this may not lead to drastic unemployment levels,
but create mild undulations in the local economy causing the workers to
compromise with lesser pay packages. Literature in this regard is of the view
that if there is any change recognized in the organization that affects the
individuals (Wilson, 2004). (Tehrani 2007) changes from merger have seen
negative impact on well-being in context to accept that change and can also add
the stress on workplace level. As (Vaananen, 2004) measured change solely
through employees perceptions of whether or not their standing at work had
changed during the period of a merger. The effect of merger and acquisition on
employee moral can have significant impact if the reorganization of the merged
firm is not handled successfully. Change from the result of merger can be
difficult and leads to the stress that has a negative impact on employee morale
17 | P a g e

(Richards, 2009), and the factor which lead to the stress is lack of
communication passes from top level to lower level management during merger
times (Pophal, 2009).

Generally speaking, impact of merger and acquisitions brings a win- win
situation for the customers; this is because the customers are left with a high range
of products with a low range of price. From the banking perspective, mergers can
result in customers receiving more services which generally include larger loan
limits, more branches and more Automated Teller Machines(ATMs)(Turillo and
Sullivan, 1987).The American Economic Review (Dario Focarelli and Fabio
Panetta,2003) has reported that there is strong evidence that although consolidation
generates adverse price changes, these are of a temporary nature and in the long
run, efficiency gains dominate over the market power effect, leading to more
customer friendly pricing of bank services. The merger of Bank of Madura with that
of ICICI Bank in 2001 is an excellent example of a very successful merger in an
altogether diverse community benefiting a large number of consumers. ICICI Bank
branches have expanded from around 7 in 2000-01 to around 270 in 2005-06, the
largest number of ICICI Bank branches in any state, thus penetrating the southern
markets (Ravi Kumar, 2007).

However contradicting the above, service levels greatly declined after Wells
Fargos acquisition of Norwest in 2000, and also during a series of aquistions by
fleet bank (Knut Meyer , Everest Group,2004).In traditional bank mergers,
customer attrition of 5 to 10 percent is common , driven by consumer dissatisfaction
with the acquiring bank and branch consolidation or changes in service levels.
18 | P a g e

However, this loss is usually offset by cost reduction (K.Unnikrishnan, 2006). This
is usually due to customer skittishness about the solvency of the merging troubled
banks and the security of their deposits. High-value customers are the most likely to
leave as they seek low-risk, top-quality institutions in which to place their
significant assets. They can and will depart at the slightest hint of instability, and
they are being aggressively courted by stronger banks. Even relatively minor
customer-facing operational problems such as a glitch in the ATM network or
delays in posting deposits could result in significant attrition of customers
(Booz&Co, 2008). A study of thousands of U.S. bank mergers by Stephen
Rhoades, concluded that service to customers did not improve as a consequence of
any of the mergers. Other studies have found that mergers led to increased fees,
branch closures and low level customer service (Canadian Community
Reinvestment Coalition, 2006). According to Reichheld, a perception of
exorbitant fees for services, inadequate employee service; gaps in the menu of
services and products, delays on account of bank mistakes and low deposit interest
rates may cause customers to leave.

19 | P a g e

Industrial Credit & Investment Corporation of India (ICICI) was

incorporated on January 5, 1994 under the Companies Act, 1956 .The Transferee
Bank, as of May 21, 2010, has a network of 2,000 branches and extension counters
and has over 5,300 automated teller machines (ATMs). At present the bank has
79,978 employees with strong financial like total assets of Rs. 3634 billion, total
deposits of Rs. 2020.16 billion, advances of Rs. 1812.06 billion and net profit of Rs.
42.25 billion as on March 2010. The amalgamation of the Transferor Bank with the
Transferee Bank was in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme formulated
pursuant to Section 44A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Reserve Bank of
Indias guidelines for merger/amalgamation of private sector banks dated May 11,
2005, and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 1956,
and the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Transferor Bank and the
Transferee Bank and other applicable provisions of laws. The objectives and
benefits of this merger are clearly mentioned in the scheme of this merger by
The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. was incorporated on May 7, 1943 as a Company.
The Bank of Rajasthan had a network of 463 branches and 111 automated teller
machines (ATMs) as of March 31, 2009. Its presence had been in 24 states with 463
branches as a profitable and well-capitalized Bank with men power strength of
more than 4300. The balance sheet of the Bank shows that it had total assets of Rs.
173 billion, deposits of Rs. 150.62 billion, and advances of Rs. 83.29 billion as on
March 2010. The profit and loss account of the bank shows the net profit as Rs.
-1.02 billion as on March 2010, which shows that bank, was not in good financial
Scheme of Merger:

20 | P a g e

The amalgamation of the Transferor Bank with the Transferee Bank was in
accordance with the provisions of the Scheme formulated pursuant to Section 44A
of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Reserve Bank of Indias guidelines for
merger/amalgamation of private sector banks dated May 11, 2005, and in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and the
Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Transferor Bank and the Transferee
Bank and other applicable provisions of laws.
Objectives and Benefits
BoR had deep penetration with huge brand value in the State of Rajasthan
where it had 294 branches with a market share of 9.3% in total deposits of
scheduled commercial banks. It was presumed that the merger Transferee Bank
among the top three banks in Rajasthan in terms of total deposits and significantly
augment the Transferee Banks presence and customer base in Rajasthan and it
would significantly add 463 branches in branch network of ICICI Bank along with
increase in retail deposit base. Consequently, ICICI Bank would get sustainable
competitive advantage over its competitors in Indian Banking.
ICICI bank approved merging of Bank of Rajasthan (BoR) with itself on 18
May 2010. The share swap ratio was announced at 25:118 (25 shares of ICICI Bank
for 118 shares of BoR). The Reserve Bank of India on 13th August 2010 gave its
nod to the merger.
Deal Structure
The amalgamation of Bank of Rajasthan by ICICI was a no-cash deal. The
deal was valued at Rs.3041 crores. Each share of BoR was valued at Rs.189/21 | P a g e

giving a premium of around Rs.90 per share. On price per branch basis, ICICI paid
Rs.65.7 million per branch.
Post Merger Performance
The following table shows the post merger profitability, solvency and
liquidity ratios of the merged entity.




Current Ratio




Quick Ratio




Total Debt/Equity Ratio




Net Profit Margin




Return on Long Term




Return on Net Worth








Table: Post Merger Analysis

Post merger results were satisfactory. The liquidity position i.e the quick ratio had
increased after merger. Debt equity ratio also improved, Net Profit margin is
increasing year by year. Return on net worth had increased after merger and the
EPS has taken a good move after merger. Hence, the merger is good for both the
Benefits to Shareholders

22 | P a g e

Post merger the EPS was Rs. 36.10 while the P.E ratio was 22.97. The
dividends rose by 120% while the return on average equity was 7.58. So the merger
was beneficial from the shareholders point of view.
Effect on Employees
When the information about this merger was communicated to the
employees, they did not accept this merger. All the employees were against this
merger. All the three major employee unions i.e. All India Bank of Rajasthan
Employees Federation, All India Bank of Rajasthan Officers' Association and Akhil
Bhartiya Bank of Rajasthan Karmchari Sangh, called the strike demanding the
immediate termination of the ICICI-BoR merger proposal. It is a very strong
phenomenon of the behaviour of employees in the growth strategy like mergers and
acquisitions.. At this juncture, the biggest challenge for ICICI Bank Ltd. was to
encounter the agitation from the 4300 BoR employees.
Benefits to Customers
All customers were extended seamless services as per the Bank of Rajasthan
procedures. All BoR products continued with current features and charges.
Customers continued to transact using their current BoR cheque books, ATM cards,
lockers etc. The minimum balance requirements and service charges on all type of
accounts will remained unchanged.
Post the system integration customers benefited from ICICI Bank's enhanced
branch network of over 2500 branches and over 5600 ATMs spread across 1400
locations in the country. The Bank now has a presence in 18 international locations.
ICICI Bank's extensive product suite caters to all banking requirements, both
corporate and retail, backed by a world class technology platform.

23 | P a g e

This paper attempted to provide an analysis of impact of M&As on the
operating performance, shareholders, human resource and customer service of the
24 | P a g e

Indian banking business. the literature review suggests that bank mergers have the
potential to improve performance of the firm through increased profitability by
enhancing efficiency levels post-merger. There is however no consistent evidence
about increased efficiency levels post-merger, in the banking sector across the
globe. Most of the studies relate to bank mergers in US, Europe and Australia and
have found no convincing evidence on the increase in efficiency gains resulting
from bank mergers. Studies have also found improvements in technical efficiency in
bank mergers. Empirical results reveal that M&As can have significant impact if the
reorganization of the merged firm is not handled successfully. Change from the
result of merger can be difficult and leads to the stress that has a negative impact on
employee morale. M&As result in customers receiving more services which
generally include larger loan limits, more branches and more Automated Teller
Machines(ATMs).These results are further reiterated by the case study of merger of
ICICI Bank with the Bank of Rajasthan. The amalgamation of ICICI bank with
Bank of Rajasthan came in to effect on August 13, 2010 when RBI approved the
deal. Post merger results are satisfactory. Merger has increased the liquidity and
profitability position of ICICI bank. HR ISSUES have always being a major
concern for the merging firms because the major impact of this merger is on the
employment position of employees of BOR. The merger has increased no. of
branches and no. of ATMs. Hence, the merger is beneficial for both the banks.
Hence we conclude that mergers and acquisitions are beneficial for the Indian banks
and shall enable the Indian banking industry to combat the global competition.


25 | P a g e

1. Hawawini, G. and Swary, I. (1990), Mergers and Acquisitions in the US

Banking industry, Evidence from the Capital Markets, Amsterdam (North
Holland Publishing Company).
2. Kaplan, S. N, Hietala, P. and David T. R., (2002), What is the Price of
Hubris? Using Takeover Battles to Infer Overpayments and Synergies, ,
Financial Management, Volume 32, Number 3,Autumn, 2003.
3. Ravi Kumar, P.H. (2007), How do Bank mergers affect various entities?
Bank Mergers: The Indian Scenario.
1. Akhavein, J.D., Berger, A.N. and Humphrey, D. B. (1997), The effects of
Megamergers on Efficiency and Prices: Evidence from a Bank Profit Function,
Review of Industrial Organization, Vo.12, pp.95-139.
2. Berger, A.N. and Mester, L.J. (2003), Explaining the dramatic changes in
performance of US banks: technological change, deregulation, and dynamic
changes in competition," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Vol. 12, No.1,
pp.573. Berger, A.N. and Humphrey, D. B. (1997), Efficiency of Financial Institutions:
International Survey and Directions for Future Research, European Journal of
Operational Research, Elsevier, Vol.98, No.2, pp.175-212.
4. Berger, A.N. and Humphrey, D.B. (1991), The dominance of inefficiencies
over scale and product mix economies in banking, Journal of Monetary
Economics, Vol.28, pp.117-148.
26 | P a g e

5. Berger, A.N. and Humphrey, D.B. (1997), Efficiency of financial institutions:

International survey and directions for future research, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vo.98, pp.172-212.
6. Berger, A.N., Demsetz, R.S. and Strahan, P. E. (1999), The consolidation of the
financial services industry: Causes, consequences and implications for the
future, Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol.23, Nos.2-4, pp.135-194.
7. Berger, A.N., Demsetz. R.S. and Strahan. P.E. (1999), The consolidation of
financial services industry: Causes, consequences and implications for the
future, Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol.23, Nos.2-4, pp. 135-194.
8. Berger, A.N, Hancock,D, Humphrey.D.B. (1993a), Bank efficiency derived
from the profit function, Journal of Banking and Finance, 17, Nos.2-3, pp.317347.
9. Berger.A.N. Hunter.W.C. and Timme.S.G. (1993), The efficiency of financial
institutions: A review and preview of research past, 266
10.Bharadwaj, S.G., Varadarajan, P. R. and Fahy, J.(1993), A Sustainable
competitive advantage in service industries, Journal of Marketing. Chicago:
Oct 1993. Vol. 57, No.4, pp.83 100.
11.Bhattacharyya, A., Lovell, C.A.K. and Sahay,P. (1997), The impact of
liberalization on the productive efficiency of Indian commercial banks.
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.98, pp.332-345.
27 | P a g e

12.Cornett, M. M. and Tehranian, H. (1992),Changes in Corporate performance

associated with bank acquisitions, Journal of Financial Economics,
13.Cornett, M.M., McNutt, J.J. and Tehranian, H. (2006) Performance changes
around mergers: revenue enhancements versus cost reductions, Journal of
Money, Credit and Banking, Vol.38 (4), pp.1013-1050.
14.Cybo-Ottone, A. and Murgia, M. (2000), Mergers and Shareholder Wealth in
European Banking, Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol.24, No.6, pp. 831-859.

15.Ghosh, A. (2001), Does operating performance really improves following

corporate acquisitions? Journal of Corporate Finance, Vo.7, pp.151-178.
16.Healey, P. M., Palepu, K. G. and Rubeck, R. S. (1992), Does corporate
performance improve after mergers? , Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.31,
17.Hughes, J.P. and Mester, L.J. (1993), A quality and risk-adjusted cost function
for banks: evidence on the too-big-to-fail doctrine. Journal of Productivity
Analysis, Vol.4, pp.293-315
18.Kaplan, S.N. (2006), Mergers and Acquisitions: A Financial Economics







Economists Roundtable on Merger Enforcement on January, 19, 2006.

28 | P a g e

19.68. Kaplan, S. and Weisbach, M. (1992), The Success of Acquisitions:

Evidence from Divestitures, Journal of Finance, Vol.47, No.1, pp. 107-138.
20.93. Pilloff , S.J.(1996),Performance Changes and Shareholder Wealth Creation
Associated with Mergers of Publicly Traded Banking
21.Rhoades, S.A. (1993), The Efficiency effects of Horizontal Bank Mergers,
Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol.17, pp.411-422.
22.Rhoades, S.A. (1998), The efficiency effects of bank mergers: An overview of
case studies of nine mergers, Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol.22, pp.273291.
23.Rhodes, S.A. (1993), The efficiency effects of horizontal bank mergers,
Journal of Banking and Finance, 17, 411-22.
24.Sharma, D. and Ho, J. (2002), The impact of acquisitions on operating
performance: some Australian evidence Journal of Business Finance and
Accounting, Vol.29, pp.155-200.
25. Mohan, T. T. R. (2005), Bank Consolidation: Issues and Evidence, Economic
and Political Weekly, March 19, 2005
1. Berger, A.N. (1998), The efficiency effects of bank mergers and acquisition:
A preliminary look at the 1990s data (Conference paper presented in the
NYU Conference on Mergers and Financial Institutions)
2. Berger, A.N. and Humphrey,D.B. (1992), Megamergers in banking and the
use of cost efficiency as an anti-trust defense. Antitrust Bulletin 37,541-600.
29 | P a g e

3. Coelli, T. (1996), A guide to DEAP Version 2.1, A Data Envelopment

Analysis (Computer)Program, CEPA Working Paper 96/08.
4. Cybo-Ottone, A. and Murgia, M. (1996), Mergers and Acquisitions in the
European Banking Market, Working Paper, University of Pavia, Italy, 1996.
5. Narasimham, M. (1991), Committee report on Financial System, Reserve
Bank of India (Chairman: M. Narasimham).

1. www.iba.org.in IBA (Indian Banks Association)
2. www.rbi.org.in
3. http://www.icici.com
4. http://www.moneycontrol.com
5. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com

30 | P a g e