Amagi Media Labs CEO, MD, chairman, board of directors and AGM

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 23 Sep 2026, 6 fund houses so far (houses' deadline to file 15 Oct 2026)

• Receive, consider and adopt the audited standalone financial statements of the Company for the financial year ended March 31, 2026, together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Statutory Auditor thereon.MoreLess

  6 for0 against
• Receive, consider and adopt the audited consolidated financial statements of the Company for the financial year ended March 31, 2026, and the report of the Statutory Auditor thereon.

  6 for0 against
• Re-appoint Mr. Shekhar Kirani Hanumanthasetty (DIN: 02384548) as a director liable to retire by rotation.

  6 for0 against
• Consider and approve the re-appointment of Mr. Baskar Subramanian (DIN: 02014529) as Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

  6 for0 against
• Consider and approve the terms of remuneration payable to Mr. Baskar Subramanian (DIN: 02014529), Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

  6 for0 against
• Appoint BMP and Co. LLP, Practicing Company Secretaries as the Secretarial Auditors of the Company.

  6 for0 against
• Approve reclassification of Authorised Share Capital and consequential alteration of Clause V of the Memorandum of Association of the Company.

  6 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 3 Apr 2026, 12 fund houses

• APPROVAL FOR ALTERATION OF THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE COMPANY

  ›Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual Fund, HDFC Mutual Fund, ICICI Prudential Mutual Fund, PGIM India Mutual Fund, SBI Mutual Fund

  • Bandhan Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual FundCompliant with law. Governance concern: The combination of a low threshold (6%) and changing “top 2 investors” criteria may lead to Board instability and disproportionate rights. Special Rights to investors in the nature of Nomination of Director on the Board appear to be excessive w.r.t. the proposed minimum 6% shareholding thresholds.
  • Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual FundThe proposed amendment to the Article of Association grants board nomination rights to the top 2 investors by shareholding, with a minimum threshold of 6% on a fully diluted basis. We believe that the threshold should be minimum 10%. Also, the criteria limited to top 2 investors may create a ratcheting mechanism for top shareholders to gain top 2 shareholder rank, which would lead to board instability. This is not in the best interests of the minority shareholders and institutional investors. Hence, we do not support the resolution.
  • HDFC Mutual FundPrior to company’s IPO the promoters and certain investors: Accel India VI (Mauritius) Ltd., Accel Growth VI Holdings (Mauritius) Ltd., Trudy Holdings, AVP I Fund, Norwest Venture Partners X-Mauritius , PI Opportunities Fund-I, PI Opportunities Fund-II and PI Opportunities Fund-I Scheme II and General Atlantic Singapore AML PTE LTD, entered into a shareholding agreement (SHA). All rights under the SHA terminated upon listing of the company’s shares on the stock exchanges, except for the right to nominate directors on the board. Accordingly, the company proposes to delete Part B of the AoA and insert Article 64B to formalize this right. As per Article 64B, each of the top two investors by shareholding, shall be entitled to appoint one non-executive director on the board, provided the investor holds at least 6.0% shareholding on a fully diluted basis. The proposed threshold for board nomination is low. We do not support the resolution.
  • ICICI Prudential Mutual FundThe proposed threshold for board nomination is at 6% (below 10% threshold) and hence AMC had voted against the resolution.
  • PGIM India Mutual FundCompliant with law. Governance concern: The combination of a low threshold (6%) and changing top 2 investors criteria may lead to Board instability and disproportionate rights. Special Rights to investors in the nature of Nomination of Director on the Board appear to be excessive w.r.t. the proposed minimum 6% shareholding thresholds.
  • SBI Mutual FundPrior to company’s IPO the promoters and certain investors: Accel India VI (Mauritius) Ltd., Accel Growth VI Holdings (Mauritius) Ltd., Trudy Holdings, AVP I Fund, Norwest Venture Partners X-Mauritius , PI Opportunities Fund-I, PI Opportunities Fund-II and PI Opportunities Fund-I Scheme II and General Atlantic Singapore AML PTE LTD, entered into a shareholding agreement (SHA). All rights under the SHA terminated upon listing of the company’s shares on the stock exchanges, except for the right to nominate directors on the board. Accordingly, the company proposes to delete Part B of the AoA and insert Article 64B to formalise this right. As per Article 64B, each of the top two investors by shareholding, shall be entitled to appoint one non-executive director on the board, provided the investor holds at least 6.0% shareholding on a fully diluted basis. The proposed threshold for board nomination is below our 10% threshold under our voting guidelines. We do not support the resolution.

  5 for7 against
• RATIFICATION OF THE AMAGI EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION PLAN 2025 OF AMAGI MEDIA LABS LIMITED

  ›Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual Fund, HDFC Mutual Fund, ICICI Prudential Mutual Fund, PGIM India Mutual Fund

  • Bandhan Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual Fund, PGIM India Mutual FundNon-compliant with SEBI (SBEB & SE) Regulations, 2021: The Company has not disclosed the Exercise Price/ Pricing Formula. The intent behind SEBI mandating disclosure of exercise price in the Notice, is that the shareholders could estimate the economic benefit proposed to be transferred to its employees during the course of time. Non-disclosure or authorizing NRC to decide such price defeats the purpose of SEBI requiring Companies to disclose such information.
  • Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual FundThe company seeks approval for ratification of ESOP 2025 of the company and grant of stock options, under which up to 2,30,13,130 stock options may be granted. This will lead to a dilution of ~9.61% due to the proposed scheme. The units may be granted at a discount to the market price, since it is only disclosed that the exercise price would be greater than face value. However, there is no clarity on the maximum discount that may be granted. In the absence of objective disclosures regarding the exercise price, we do not support the resolution.
  • HDFC Mutual FundLack of clarity on the pricing of ESOPs. We do not support the resolution.
  • ICICI Prudential Mutual FundThe exercise price/formula under the scheme is unclear and hence AMC had voted against the resolution.

  6 for6 against
• RATIFICATION OF THE EXTENSION OF THE BENEFITS OF AMAGI EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION PLAN 2025 TO THE EMPLOYEES OF SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES OF THE COMPANY

  ›Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual Fund, HDFC Mutual Fund, ICICI Prudential Mutual Fund, PGIM India Mutual Fund

  • Bandhan Mutual Fund, PGIM India Mutual FundNo concern identified w.r.t the proposed extension of the benefits of the Scheme to the employees of the subsidiary companies. Non-compliant with SEBI (SBEB & SE) Regulations, 2021: However, SES identifies compliance concern as it is interlinked with Resolution #2.
  • Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual FundSame rationale as resolution #2. As the resolution for ESOP 2025 is not supported, related resolutions cannot be supported.
  • Edelweiss Mutual FundNo concern identified w.r.t the proposed extension of the benefits of the Scheme to the employees of the subsidiary companies. Non-compliant with SEBI (SBEB & SE) Regulations, 2021:
  • HDFC Mutual FundLack of clarity on the pricing of ESOPs. We do not support the resolution.
  • ICICI Prudential Mutual FundThe exercise price/formula under the scheme is unclear and hence AMC had voted against the resolution.

  6 for6 against
• CONTRIBUTION OF FUNDS TOWARDS CHARITABLE PURPOSES

  ›Against Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual Fund, Edelweiss Mutual Fund, HDFC Mutual Fund, SBI Mutual Fund

  • Baroda BNP Paribas Mutual FundThe company has reported losses in last 4 years. Charitable contributions above the regulatory limit, > 5% of avg. net profit for 3 preceding FY, cannot be viewed as a financially prudent decision.
  • Edelweiss Mutual FundCompliant with law. Governance & Transparency Concern: Inadequate disclosure regarding the organization(s) to which the Company intends to donate. Charitable Contributions may not be financially prudent at present, given the consecutive losses incurred by the Company over the last few financial years.
  • HDFC Mutual FundThe company proposes to undertake contributions towards education and other social initiatives, including a flagship programme in rural Tamil Nadu expected to benefit ~800 students annually. While the initiative addresses gaps in access to experiential learning, the rationale for the proposed aggregate contributions of up to Rs. 27.5 mn up to FY29, with an annual limit of Rs. 10.0 mn is unclear, given that the company has been reporting net losses since FY22. We believe companies should undertake charitable contributions within the 5% limit prescribed under Section 181. Alternatively, the company should prioritise returning value to shareholders once it generates profits, allowing shareholders to make charitable contributions as they deem appropriate. We do not support the resolution.
  • SBI Mutual FundThe company proposes to undertake contributions towards education and other social initiatives, including a flagship programme in rural Tamil Nadu expected to benefit ~800 students annually. The initiative addresses gaps in access to experiential learning, the rationale for the proposed aggregate contributions of up to Rs. 27.5 mn up to FY29, with an annual limit of Rs. 10.0 mn is unclear, given that the company has been reporting net losses since FY22.We believe companies should undertake charitable contributions within the 5% limit prescribed under Section 181. Alternatively, the company should prioritise returning value to shareholders once it generates profits, allowing shareholders to make charitable contributions as they deem appropriate. We do not support the resolution.

  8 for4 against

• Tax disputeIncome Tax Department and Deputy Commission of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1), BengaluruSince 21 Jan 2026
  The Company attended the Personal Hearing and the matter was adjourned.
  At the filing before: An Assessment order was issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Company had filed an appeal.
• Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 1 (1), BengaluruSince 18 Mar 2026
  The Company attended the personal hearing and paid 10% of the demand value as pre deposit. The Company is in process of filing the grounds of appeal.
  At the filing before: Demand was raised for payment of tax along with interest under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Company had filed an Appeal.
• Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Audit)Since 29 Apr 2026
  The Company has filed an appeal.
  At the filing before: An Assessment order has been issued by the office of Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Audit)
• Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 1 (1), BengaluruSince 14 May 2026
  The Company has filed an appeal.
  At the filing before: An Assessment order has been issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In the company's own words, from its latest governance filing.

The board is made up as the listing rules require

Yes

The board has a regular chairperson

Yes

The company has a risk management committee

No

The chair is related to the managing director

No

The filing has a part on fines and penalties

No

The filing has a part on tax disputes

Yes

There was a cyber security incident in the quarter

Yes

The company's own answers in its filing.