Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by Kuldeepraj Gautam (23074427)

1 case CSS entry done contract no-373350 CSS creation done but CSS submission showing below error
Amardeep Sir: - Please check it now.

User: - After select contract detail not showing in Submission Details.

Shailesh: - This done now, plz check and confirm.

User: - After submit showing below in CSS Submission.

Amardeep Sir: - It’s done, please check.

User: - Again showing –as discuss pls check with my ID—23074427, password - kuldeep3.
Not able to see any uploaded document. Branch has uploaded the same in approval and receipt menu.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by ROHIT ANAND (24003517)

Menu Rights Given to REMARKS sub Remarks

Name (For Testing in
UAT Server)
Settlement BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC WORKING FINE
Working & HO Accounts
Team
Leader/Mentor
CSS BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC WORKING FINE
Creation & HO Accounts
Team
Leader/Mentor
CSS BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC Rights required in RO-i.e. ERROR -
Submission & HO Accounts ROC & BOF javax.naming.NameNotFoundException: While
Team trying to look up comp/env/jdbc/null in
Leader/Mentor /app/webapp/Universal236_13Mar2014.war/249
4087.; remaining name 'comp/env/jdbc/null'
Shailesh: - As per CG’s CSS This is done, Plz check and confirm.
Submission will done by
AA & BAC, hence rights
are given to them.
But why ROC & BOF
require this right. Plz
confirm the same
CCS First RAC/ZAC & HO
Level Accounts Team
Approval Leader/Mentor

CSS submission ----

While selecting contract no for CSS submission (Agr no 484283) below error display, please look into.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by Ananth (24003986)

User ID 24003986 (with same SN/EMLAP password) is unable to login Mahanidhi for Testing.

Bhavesh: - As discussed, please check and give complete feedback on CSS Module. Your password is
91823822.

User: - now we are able to login the module and checked the CSS module and it is working.
Herewith attached the screenshot for your reference.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by Sahani Rakesh (24004212)

Agmt.no. 3040707 of DNB branch not showing in Mahanidhi for RC updation/Settlement.

Shailesh: - Data given for testing is taken from live instance and it is only up to 3rd Feb’14. So request you
use the data that is updated within the above said date only.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by GANESH PUTHANIKAR (24007093)

Mahanidhi sever is very fast processing, but there is some query is there in capturing contract data as
below.
Menu Name Rights Given to (For Testing Feedback Remarks
in UAT Server)
Settlement BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO OD amount not capturing Amount What is
Working Accounts Team actual as per due, its available in WEB TB
Leader/Mentor taking EMI arrears we are displaying
here.
CSS Creation BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Matured contract Agreement end date
Accounts Team remarks, if contract of contract 1411321
Leader/Mentor matured but one EMI is 24/06/2014, hence
pending, then remarks it is not a mature
not taking as matured. contract.
CSS Submission BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO If there is once correct PLz don’t cross check
Accounts Team data can captured as per data in SN live,
Leader/Mentor SOA/SN then will submit instead check with SN
the same, there is no issue report server.
for the same.
CCS First Level RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Data given for testing
Approval Team Leader/Mentor is taken from live
instance and it is only
up to 3rd Feb’14. So
request you to use
the data that is
updated within the
above said date only.
CSS Final Approval HO Accounts Team
Leader/Mentor
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by GOVIND MEESIYAVAR (23066617)

Pls find the both settlement working screen shot, in emlap settlement amount showing credit of Rs.
37500/-. But this customer not paid any excess amount.
SN settlement amount: 360903/- In emlap: 323404/-
Below said contract settlement working sheet is currect.
Its working
Shailesh: - Plz don’t cross check data in SN live, instead check with SN report server.
Data given for testing is taken from live instance and it is only up to 3rd Feb’14. So request you to use
the data that is updated within the said date only.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by VENKATESH R. (24007309)

Menu Name Rights Given to (For Testing in UAT Server) VENKATESH R

Settlement Working BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor WORKING

CSS Creation BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor WORKING

CSS Submission BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor WORKING

CCS First Level Approval RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor

CSS Final Approval HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor

Shailesh: - CSS Submission Rights are given to all BAC. Plz find the same below in your login. Add a
contract in CSS Creation module and find the same contract in CSS Submission and submit the same.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by GANGADHARA PATTAR (23066615)

Both modules are working.

CLOSURE ENTRY-OK
SETTLEMENT WORKING-OK
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by BAJIBABU G (23073073)

I have tested some of the agreements in mahanidhi and below are the observations.

1. In case of PCL, system is not allowing as billing is pending

2. We are unable to submit CSS due to SQL error
3. System is not considering net AFC amount in settlement price
4. Not considering last payment details and in CSS it is adding up with installment arrear. Might be
due to this reason, slightly AFC amount is differing with SN amount

Today I will ask our AA also to send CSS simultaneously. So that any errors in settlement working figures
will be identified.
We will verify cases which are matured before February also regarding consideration of last receipt
amount.

2350247 PCL

In case of PCL closure, SWS menu is not allowing to next screen.

Shailesh: - It is same as SN. And Plz don’t cross check data in SN live, instead check with SN report server
as I checked below. For same contract.

649441 NORMAL

While submitting CSS, above mentioned error is coming

Shailesh: - It’s done, Plz check now and confirm.

1458914 PCL

Net AFC is not considering in net settlement price.

Shailesh: - We are checking the same will update once it is done.

1943221 PCL
AFC DUE IS 13375 BUT WHERE IN MAHANIDHI IT IS SHOWING 13764

AND NOT CONSIDERING LAST RECEIPT AMOUNT OF RS 31800.

Shailesh: -Data given for testing is taken from live instance and it is only up to 3rd Feb’14. So request you
to use the data that is updated within the above said date only.

Shailesh: - Thanks for your feedback.

 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by BABU GIRI (24000330)

Last Inst Shailesh Remark

Ag no. Date Remarks

2513155 20.12.2013 In this Contract no outstanding is there , in We are checking the same will update
"Balance Amount Transfer " asking to enter once it is done. Plz proceed with other
amount without this it is not allowing further- contracts.
Screen shot Attached - 1
SHAILESH:- Done, check and confirm.

Working on the same will update once it

Un able to enter Receipt details is done

In Submission Details - Error coming - Screen This done , plz check and confirm
shot attached

1535235 15.01.2014 It is Matured Case - Selected Closure Type "
Matured contract Closure " but it is not
allowing - showing as " This is not a Mature
Contract", by selecting Pre-closure it is
allowing
Agreement end date of contract
1535235 is 14/07/2014 , hence it is not a
mature contract

Working on the same will update once it

Un able to enter Receipt details is done

In Submission Details - Error coming - Screen This done , plz check and confirm
shot attached

Collected Receipt details not shown any Working on the same will update once it
2473073 where is done

Here it is not allowing further until to enter some amount - 1

Error in Submission – 3
Unable to save
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by VICKY TUTEJA (23082784)

In contact no 2593174, randomly selected, pre-closure amt differs as shown below and also there is no
OD as per SN but in Mahanidhi it shows and also different amt shows in AFC & CRA in Settlement
Working.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by VIJAYKUMAR MATH (23101251)

Menu Name Rights Given to (For Testing in UAT Server) feedback

It’s easy to prepare for CSS of normal, pcl &

Settlement BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team disposal files; it will show all in settlement
Working Leader/Mentor working details what we need for closure.

BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Working

CSS Creation Leader/Mentor

BAC/AA/RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team Working

CSS Submission Leader/Mentor

CCS First Level RAC/ZAC & HO Accounts Team RO level rights only
Approval Leader/Mentor

CSS Final RO level rights only

Approval HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by SHARMA VIJAY - JAIPUR (24003954)

Not able to see any uploaded document. Branch has uploaded the same in approval and receipt menu.

Shailesh: - We checked the same it is working fine.

Documents that are uploaded during CSS creation will be only able to view in this menu. Check and
confirm.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by T V S D GANESH (24000110)

Feedback on CSS creation and settlement working.

I have checked few normal and pre-closure contracts to give the below feedback.

Menu Sub menu Remarks – Status (HO) Remark – Status (HO) –

name 15.03.2014 17.03.2014 17.03.2014
CSS All menus 1. After selecting the Prefix CSS to all
Settlement working the SM keys.
sheet in CSS, heading Alternatively we
of the main module can think of
"Settlement working giving the
sheet" should be navigation tab a
displayed on top of common name
the screen along with and display
sub menus - Enter that.
Contract number,
Contract details and
Settlement working.
Likewise it should be
for CSS Creation, CSS
Submission and RA /
ZA approval also.
Settlement Settlement 2. "Net settlement Addressed Working Fine
working working price" in Settlement
sheet working is blank if
there is no debit
balance under
INSTALLMENT
ARREAR and
PRINICPAL
OUTSTANDING
(reference agmt no’s
: 809164, 927773)
Settlement 3. In "Net settlement Addressed Working Fine Need to Discuss
working price" in settlement other than the
working showing credit entries
sum of debit balance which are to be
under INSTALLMENT discretionary
ARREAR and (not to reflect
PRINICPAL in Settlement
OUTSTANDING figure if we
components only (if want to collect
SOA balance is credit settlement
then it is showing figure including
only sum of credit balances)
 PRINCIPAL
OUTSTANDING
components)
ignoring all other
components like net
AFC, CRA charges,
memo entries etc
(reference agmt no’s
: 1499092, 2403382)
Settlement 4. In "Net settlement It is just This is required Need to Discuss
working price" in settlement displayed in the to reflect in
working INSURANCE balances. But Settlement
PREMIUM PAYABLE - not adjusted in working but to
MLS is wrongly settlement be allowed as
coming (reference working. Display checking point
agmt no’s: 927773, is removed now. and if required
1171905, 1266055 - to be
all these contracts considered as
we have covered MLS credit (if same
and we have issued is due to excess
MLS certificates also credit)
to these customers).
Only genuine credits
like we have
collected MLS
amount but not
covered (by mistake)
should only come in
the settlement
working because we
have pass on the
credit to customer
while doing
settlement. Financial
movement query
reports attached in
separate excel file.
Settlement 5. If we allow users Will take up in
working to process the next phase.
settlement working
through CSS module
only then there is a
need of correction of
amounts for
nullifying the memo
credits (not debits)
which is due to
expenses might not
 have cleared or not
to pass on the credits
/ excess collections
(like Travel debits,
parking charges etc)
so that we can have
revised settlement
working based on
that we can generate
settlement and issue
to customer. If we
add one parallel
column "credits not
to consider" in
settlement working
along with Account
description, debit
and credit we can
generate perfect net
settlement price.
Settlement 6. In Settlement Replied on my 1. Settlement working as per SN
working working "Report" is earlier mail - working break & MN are
not working properly >new remark : up in report for matching
- if Net settlement working as per net settlement
price is blank then SN & MN are price is not
report is not getting matching matching (ref
generated - it agmt no.
showing some 2245644).
message that "SOA 2. Settlement
report for contract date mistake in
no. so and so already report. It is
exists with AFC rate taking current
60" - it should display date report
nil report if where as if we
settlement is nil generate
(reference agmt no settlement as
1171905 - Annexure of earlier date
1) . If Net settlement then mismatch
price is not nil then in both report.
complete page is not 3. Settlement
getting displayed, method is not
only first page is displayed.
displayed (Reference
agmt no. 1266055 -
Annexure 2) - report
saving option should
be available to save
complete report.
Contract 7. Report date in It is because,
details Contract details this particular
should be report data itself was
generation date - taken from live
settlement processed instance to
on 15.03.2014 and Mahanidhi
report date shown as testing server as
13.03.2014 on 14th mar '14.
(reference
agreement no.
:927773 - Annexure
3)
Enter 8. "SAVE & PROCEED Cannot be
Contract (F10)" option not changed. It is
number and required in "Enter program control
Contract Contract number"
details screen and "Contract
details" screen. it
should be auto saved
once screen is moved
forward.
Settlement 9. Screen moving Cannot be
working from last to first we changed. It is
have to scroll one by program control
one instead it should
allow direct selection
of first screen - it
should allow moving
back more than two
screens.
Settlement 10. After saving the Cannot be
working settlement working it changed. It is
should allow to program control
generate new
settlement working
but only option
available is "Cancel
and go back to main
menu". It should
allow for new
contract settlement
working generation.
"Continue for new
transaction (F10)" to
be allowed here.
All menus 11. Current cursor This is a product
position help is feature. We are
enough to follow the planning for
 instruction - no need multilingual tips
of field entry popup - in this tooltips
Annexure 4. field. Cannot be
changed
CSS Creation Enter 1. CSS creation is CSS & settlement
contract allowed even if working is not
number and settlement working linked to each
Settlement sheet is not other now. Both
working & processed and saved. are different as
Balance This should be locked available
because the scenario currently. Will
which is mentioned take up such
in Settlement controls in the
working sheet point second Phase
no. 5, i.e. correcting after approval of
the settlement figure management.
(due to wrong
credits), CSS creation
should be allowed
only when it is
processed and saved
in Settlement
working sheet and
same corrected
settlement working
sheet should be
picked up for
"Settlement working
& Balance". While
attending this we
have to keep in mind
the point no. 2, 3, 4
and 5 which are
mentioned above in
Settlement working
sheet.
Enter 2. In above scenario CSS & settlement
contract while creating the working is not
number CSS we should allow linked to each
agreement number other now. Both
alone in "Enter are different as
contract number" available
menu. Dates and AFC currently. Will
rate should not be take up such
allowed for change. controls in the
If any change in the second Phase
current date and after approval of
settlement working management.
 sheet process date of
a particular contract
no. it should popup
and ask to reprocess
again. If any
difference between
settlements date
with customer and
"settlement working
sheet" processing
date should be
handled at
"Settlement working
sheet processing"
only.
Enter 3. In "Enter contract this is as per the
contract number" menu existing closure
number differentiation working in SN
between "Settlement
date" and "Closure
date" not
understood. Probably
this is the query
which I raised above,
if this is same then it
should be addressed
in "Settlement
working sheet".
Settlement 4. In this settlement Addressed
working & working statement
Balance should be as per
corrected settlement
working statement
(as explained in point
no.5 above in
"Settlement working
sheet". Net
settlement price is
wrong (reference
agmt no’s 2467641,
809164, 927773,
1171905). While
attending this we
have to keep in mind
the point no. 2, 3, 4
and 5 which are
mentioned above in
"Settlement working
 sheet".
Settlement 5. CCBAL and Closure Addressed Still this is Both SN & MN
working & balance statement New Remark-> wrong. Amount workings are
Balance both are wrong. both SN & MN considered in matching in
While arriving CCBAL workings are Net Settlement 2245644. what is
from Closure balance matching in price like net the problem
statement it should 2245644. What AFC,
consider not only is the problem? Intervening
Loan receivable, charges and
Debtors account and pre-closure
Unmatured interest penalty charges
(loan) (reference not addressed
agreement no. in CCBAL and
2467641 - Annexure closure balance
5) but also it should settlement
consider the heads of (reference
settlement working agmt no.
statement like AFC, 2245644 –
Travelling, Parking, annexure 1).
Repo (all memo Matching
heads too) which are entries – 1.
covered while Installment
arriving the corrected arrear in
settlement figure. settlement
working &
Debtors
account in
closure
balance, 2. PO
– future
principal in
settlement
working &
difference
between loan
receivable and
Unmatured
interest loan in
closure
balance.
Closure 6. Closure entries Happening. Only Difference is Both SN & MN
entry should consist all the billing reversal is there – as workings are
heads which are not shown explained matching in
affected in above. 2245644. what is
settlement working the problem
as well as pending
book entries.
Receipt 7. This option is not Work in progress
details activated. Need to
allow entering the
receipt details
collection against the
settlement amount.
If there is any
difference between
the receipt total and
net settlement
amount (excess or
short fall) same has
to be popup and
need to be addressed
in Closure entry
statement before
saving the CSS
creation - this need
to be addressed.
Upload 8. After saving the will check and
documents CSS and generation revert
of CSS id upon
selecting "Exit (F9)" -
popup message is
flashing saying that
"you will lose your
data, which is not
save Do you want to
proceed?" - This is
irrelevant because
CSS id is already
generated.
All menus 9. "SAVE & PROCEED Cannot be
(F10)" option not changed. It is
required in "Enter program control
Contract number"
screen, "Contract
details" screen,
"Settlement working
& balance", "Balance
amount Transfer"
and "Closure entry" -
it should be auto
saved once screen is
moved forward.
All menus 10. Screen moving Cannot be
from last to first we changed. It is
have to scroll one by program control
one instead it should
 allow direct selection
of first screen - it
should allow moving
back more than two
screens.
All menus 11. Current cursor This is a product
position help is feature. We are
enough to follow the planning for
instruction - no need multilingual tips
of field entry popup - in this tooltips
Annexure 4. field. Cannot be
changed
12. Where to address will check and
the deviation cases - revert
short collection in
settlement figure.
Upload 13. In "Upload will be Done
documents documents" CSS addressed
history in case of
rejected case
rejection remarks are
not getting captured.
14. After complete Replied on my In case of Done
processing of CSS earlier mail. rejected case
submission while also since after
processing through adding new CSS
RA / ZA approval CSS if found any
submission (CSS id mistake then
54) is rejected and we have to
then again it is modify the
processed afresh record in the
through adding a same new CSS
record in CSS ID otherwise
creation (CSS id 56) mistake cannot
and tried the same be rectified. As
record to modify for mentioned by
correction purpose it you addition
is giving error that should be
"CSS is rejected for blocked so that
this contract" and duplicate CSS
"error in calculating ID cannot be
item : contact generated.
admin" it is not
allowing to modify
the new added
record (CSS id 56)
and it is not allowing
to proceed further. If
 same contract no.
going through
addition it is allowing
and again a new
record is getting
generating with new
CSS id 57 (reference
agmt no.2691640 -
Annexure 6).
Normally in
modifying it is
allowing to modify
any record but in
rejection cases only
we are facing this
problem.
15. In a complete Replied on my
approved CSS earlier mail
contract if we are
trying to add /
modify then two
different messages
are coming whereas
same message
should come. For
addition - "CSS
already created for
the given contract"
and if try modifying
"first level approval
has been done for
the given contract" -
Annexure 7
(reference agmt no.
2892420).
16. If we trying to will check and Done
check RA / ZA revert
approved / rejected
case in query it is
showing error
message of "Closure
approval is pending
for this contract
number". Query
should be allowed for
any case.
CSS Submission 1. Need to address Comments are
Submission details the points 1, 4, 5, 6 given above,
 and 7 in above CSS same as CSS
creation. Creation.
Submission 2. After saving the will check and This IS done.
details CSS and generation revert
of CSS id upon
selecting "Exit (F9)" -
popup message is
flashing saying that
"you will lose your
data, which is not
save Do you want to
proceed?" - This is
irrelevant because
CSS id is already
generated.
3. In above point no. will check and Done
14 if we try submit revert
the any of CSS id 56
or 57 it is giving SQL
error. Duplicate
record for same
agreement
no.2691640.
RA / ZA 1. Need to address Comments are
Approval the points 1, 4, 5, 6 given above,
and 7 in above CSS same as CSS
creation. Creation.
Remaining all
are working fine
CSS Creation Enter Repo tag Done
Contract contract not
Number able to process,
neither CSS
creation nor
settlement
working sheet
is allowed to
process.
Contract If we select Done
Details Closure type as
“Disposal
Closure” we are
getting alert
saying that
“this is not a
repossession
contract.” And
 we are not able
to check repo
tag contracts
as mentioned
above.
Contract In Closure type
Details “for refinance
“is working
fine.

Annexure 1 - Blank report in case of Nil Net settlement price case

Development is in process for reports part alone, and the same will be completed shortly.

Annexure 2 - Partial report getting generated

Development is in process for reports part alone, and the same will be completed shortly.
Annexure 3 – Report date problem in Contract details
We are checking the same will update on the same ASAP.

Annexure 4 – Field entry popup help.

Will confirm based on others feedback
Annexure 5 – Wrong CCBAL and Closure balance heads
we are checking the same will update on the same ASAP

Annexure 6 - Error screens while modifying the added record of rejected case
Since CSS is rejected, modify is not allowed for this contract but addition is allowed
Duplicate CSS id created for the same record.
Contract locking program was not enabled for this module, which is enabled today only.

Annexure 7 – Adding in CSS creation of already approved case while modifying.

It is not allowed for modification Since First Level approval is done for this contact.
While adding
below pop up raised, Since CSS for contract is already created and pending for Final approval (Rights for
final approval are given to HO Accounts Team Leader/Mentor only)

Shailesh: - 2. "Net settlement price" in Settlement working is blank if there is no debit balance under
INSTALLMENT ARREAR and PRINICPAL OUTSTANDING (reference agmt no.s : 809164, 927773)
3. In "Net settlement price" in settlement working showing sum of debit balance under INSTALLMENT
ARREAR and PRINICPAL OUTSTANDING components only (if SOA balance is credit then it is showing
only sum of PRINCIPAL OUTSTANDING components) ignoring all other components like net AFC, CRA
charges, memo entries etc (reference agmt no’s : 1499092, 2403382).

4. In "Net settlement price" in settlement working INSURANCE PREMIUM PAYABLE - MLS is wrongly
coming (reference agmt no’s: 927773, 1171905, 1266055 - all these contracts we have covered MLS and
we have issued MLS certificates also to these customers). Only genuine credits like we have collected
MLS amount but not covered (by mistake) should only come in the settlement working because we have
pass on the credit to customer while doing settlement. Financial movement query reports attached in
separate excel file. -- It is just displayed but not included in settlement price, now display is removed.

Display removed.

5. CCBAL and Closure balance statement both are wrong. While arriving CCBAL from Closure balance
statement it should consider not only Loan receivable, Debtors account and unmatured interest (loan)
(reference agreement no. 2467641 - Annexure 5) but also it should consider the heads of settlement
working statement like AFC, Travelling, Parking, Repo (all memo heads too) which are covered while
arriving the corrected settlement figure.

User: - Annexure 1 – CCBal not correct –

Amounts considered in Net settlement price like net AFC, intevening charges and preclosure penalty
charges not addressed in CCBal and closure balance statement (reference agmt no.2245644 - Annexure
1)
Matching entries - 1. Installment arrear in settlement working & Debtors account in closure balance, 2.
PO - Future principal in settlement working & difference between Loan receivable and unmatured
interest loan in closure balance
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by JOSE JESTIN & MALLAN ANAND (24004044 &
24004229)

Check contract details, check if any bal amount to be transferred to P/L like RC Deposit etc; else save and
proceed

If no amount to be transferred proceed to closure entry

In closure entry check receipt details are correct and proceed

U Can upload doc like approval, photos like for disposal etc

Save and exit

We have checked the settlement of Contract No.3006626- Sakkeer P V
this is done, check and confirm.

MMFSL EDAPPAL  JOSE JESTIN

1) Paper work can be reduced by this module (Manual CSS).

2) Can we avoid the manual CSS as it is processing through CSS submission module and what
about Form35 –can we download the same from system?
3) Closing figure for future date cannot be taken.
4) AFC rate cannot be changed

BOSE  JOSE JESTIN

1. In Settlement working sheet menu, Settlement working amt and net settlement price are different.
While on clicking the report, it shows blank details.
This is done, check and confirm

2. In contract details in settlement working sheet , there is one field available for ‘ no. of linked contract’ ,
pls check whether it is regarding the PL contract linked or not. I have checked with various contracts [PL
linked & not linked cases] for checking the PL linked details but it not works correctly. In some PL linked
contracts result was ‘0’ [cont no – 2339798], PL not linked contract result was ‘1’ [cont no -1249984].
PL , FD and Vehicle loan are linked , only if the same contracts are verified or clustered in EMLAP.
3. In Settlement working sheet menu, AFC rate can be changed only downwards, but it not works.
Checked for contract no 2260647, in @18% & @36% it shows same screen. Settlement can be
taken for future dates.
Working on the same, will update the same once it is done.
Now this is done, check and confirm
4. Settlement working is not able to take for repossessed contracts [stock]. Screen shot attached
This is done, check and confirm.

Sundar Sir: - The point related to settlement working is already addressed. Check the other points.

Anand Mallan: - On the Mahanidhi test server feedback, we had suggested to include the closure
working on True IRR method, in addition to the principal outstanding method. True IRR working would
be required in cases where customers demand waivers, and also in cases the yielded IRR is asked for
disposal loss calculations.
Further, it is informed that deviation matrix for closure terms is not confirmed by the CGMs. Kindly
arrange to provide the same.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by GOPALAKRISHNAN IYER RAJU (24000114)

Settlement working

RHP 1552929- Contract is showing repossessed and hence not allowing settlement
RHP 2148167- Customer care enquiry very slow , not displaying the same. History of rec executive is not
showing. Future installment receivable Rs.73321 is wrong. Total dues column is blank.
After save successfully, it should allow to go to another contract instead of using Cancel and go back to
main menu.

Settlement working should be allowed for R tag cases which are not getting allowed.
In the enclosed case, we have asked to park balance in P & L but the entry is showing in CCB. Since it is
MLS claim settlement, we have asked to close and book the same as loss.
In the enclosed case, this is disposal and we are unable to enter, message this is not repo contract.
Vehicle released to buyer on 31.1.14.

In this it was neither allowing reason disposal nor preclosure and when selecting matured contract it is
going.
In the enclosed instance, we have asked balance to be parked in P & L but entry is passed in CCB.

Receipt details are blank, Plz address the same in above case.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by AMOGH DOGER (23081291)

The additional AFC does not reflect in Mahanidhi and in other amount there is a minor difference of Rs.
2/-.
It is removed as per the instructions from CG & legal team.

Traveling expenses, the SOA amount should not be reduced as this was also being reduced in SN. This is
the amount that executive is collecting from the customer on his visit claiming it as his visit charges and
not as a recovery against contract. The cost incurred by executive is reimbursed through web claims in
our system.
Traveling is addressed and will not be adjusted to settlement price.

Ideally these traveling expenses should not reduce the settlement amount of customer.

In some other cases checked (enclosed) there is minor difference in settlement by Re.1 or Rs. 2 only.

In addition to this, in Simla RO we collect Rs. 500/- as NOC charges which can be waived off by RM.

These charges are being booked as NOC charges against a particular contract in SN. The same need to be
accommodated in Mahanidhi as well.
Will take up such controls in the second Phase after approval of management.

Amardeep Sir: - Please check and give your confirmation to release the same in live.
.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by KUMAR ASHOK - HAMIRPUR (24003774)

Below mentioned options in Mahanadi which is working fine.

HPA Details as under below:-

01) HPA No. 1009454 Mr. Partap Singh – PCL Amount ok. Screen shot attached.
02) HPA No. 686800 Mr. Kapil Dev – PCL Amount ok. Screen shot attached.
03) HPA No. 910194 Mr. Uttam Sain – PCL Amount ok. Screen shot attached.
04) HPA No. 1866409 Mr. Gautam Lal –PCL Amount ok. Screen shot attached.
05) HPA No. 687394 Mr. Govind Singh - PCL Amount ok. Screen shot attached.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by K ANAND (24003467)

Feedback of CSS and closure testing in Mahanidhi.

TYPE OF AGR NO NAME OF THE BRANCH CSS ID No

CLOSURES PARTY
PRECLOSURE 1971496 KANAGARAJ POLLACHI 184
Matured contract 1548420 K RAFI SALEM 85
Contract with 2440014 VARADHARAJ COIMBATORE- 86
Subvention NORTH
Contract with 2276367 RAMAMOORTHY COIMBATORE 87
Advance EMI

1. Even after selecting P&L account the amount allocated to P&L account is still showing in CCB in closure
entry.
This is done, check and confirm.

2. In the CSS creation module after transferring the balance if any we have to mandatory press the
upload document button then only the CSS no gets generated which is not required in matured case.
This is the program flow, Documents Upload is not mandatory; you can skip for the Matured cases to
proceed further.

TYPE OF AGR NO NAME OF THE BRANCH CSS ID No

CLOSURES PARTY
EQI with 1658394 SANTHAMANI COIMBATORE- 88
moratorium NORTH
EQI without 1722440 RATHINASAMY POLLACHI 89
moratorium
Credit balance in 2363718 YOGESHKUMAR COIMBATORE 90
SOA
Top up loan 967691 A NATARAJAN COIMBATORE 91

1. In case of a top up case vide Agr no: 967691 the CCB to be kept is 4146 but the same is not getting
displayed in closure entry but the same is getting displayed at the CSS submission stage.
This is done, check and confirm.

TYPE OF AGR NO NAME OF THE BRANCH CSS ID No

CLOSURES PARTY
Un-cleared 1212394 VIJAYARAGAVAN COIMBATORE- 92
cheques NORTH
1. In the above case a cheque is deposited on 15/3/2014 vide cheque no: 47833 for Rs 5300 but the same
is not getting reflected in the receipt details screen and CSS ID is created. Unless the cheque gets cleared
the system should not allow the CSS ID to be created either the system to ask for the realization date or
should be linked with Yograj Gowda's unrealized cheque master file.
Working on the same, Will update once it is done.

General observations

1. When the Balance amount transferred to CCBAL is made zero then by default the entire figure should
come in "balance amount transferred to P&L.
Validation is available, amount should be entered manually.

2. After CSS submission and saving the CSS ID the message flashed is "CSS approved and closure entry
processed" .This message should be flashed after RA/ZA approval.
This done, check and confirm.

3. There should be an option of CSS revocation at creation and submission stage.

Reject CSS entry at time of CSS Submission.

4. At settlement working module even if we press save button then also the contract details are
displayed so save button is not required at this stage.
Cannot be changed. It is program control.

5. There is no option for memo waiver processing option within CSS module which should be after RA/ZA
approval stage.
Same is available in NOC module.

6. Closure method for all types of closure is coming as "Principal outstanding by default", True rate IRR
option should also be given.
This is as per CG’s Confirmation.

7. Report for amount and nature of deviation given by which authority should be available after RA/ZA
approval stage.
Plz brief the same.

8. Exceptions also required like 1) CSS ID created but submission not done 2)CSS submitted but pending
for RA/ZA approval .It will help us in keeping proper track of CSS created and approved for closure in
system.
Will provide this, we are working on the same
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PURWAR VIKAS (24003889)

AFC calculation still has some problem.

Contract No. 157816
AFC rate Amount
36% 38334
18% 17997 (as per calculation must be 19167)
3% 1049 (as per calculation must be 3195)
Amardeep Sir: - AFC calculation is correct in MAHANIDHI & its matching With SN Settlement Working
Sheet, please find below screen shot of SN & MAHANIDHI, you can also cross check with the SN report
server

Contract Number- 1527816

Settlement Date-19/03/2014
AFC @ 3%

MAHANIDHI

SN
AFC @18%

MAHANIDHI

SN

AFC@36
SN

Contract Number- 1527816

Settlement Date-28/02/2014
AFC @ 3%
MAHANIDHI

User: - I am ok with module subject to below mention.

1. More closure method option required.
2. Header TAB to be activated.
3. AFC calculation have some problem, mail forwarded.
Report Click here to open

4. Not showing any detail.

Further once live, we will again submit our feedback.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PANDEY PRASHANT (24003753)

I have go through the module & delighted to use the same , I have sent the mail on this topics to then
DGM with CC to CFO on dated 20/10/2008, this is just FYI , few of the positive observation :-

1. User friendly & clarity on data.

2. Saving time & cost (courier & paper cost).
3. Reduced chances of errors.
4. Fixing the responsibility of approver.
5. Better monitoring
However I have few suggestions, subject to system constraints:-

1. There are option for uploading of approval mails – as current l we are taking the approvals on mail
from authority for waiver off , settlements , disposal etc , but this authority getting changes as per
operational requirements , also various deviation mails flow by assuming themselves they are authority ,
its quite difficult to monitor each & every deviation & once amount taken it will be sole responsibility of
RA to get it clear as the same is appearing in exception.

Possible way out - if provide these module rights to concern authority based on approval rights like RM
(AFC & settlements), ZM/ZA /PH (Disposal & other settlements like insurance etc.) likewise business
deviation approval in EMLAP, it may bring down the deviation & create transparency.

2. In Closure module there should specific sub reason with selects list of reason e.g. if pre- closure , a )
Normal , b) with deviation --- again if it is (b) then specified reason like – a) PDC short , b) service issue ,
c) Intentional defaulter, d) wrong scheme , e) another vehicle etc.

Similarly matured contracts settlements if deviation, addition to above (f) Poor financial condition, g)
accidental vehicle, h) customer not traceable, I) settlements through third party, J) legal, K) accounting
rectification etc.

In Disposal cases - addition to above l) insurance claim ,m) MLS claim , n) death of customer , o) higher
funding etc.

System should also display deviation & not allow to process through the normal settlements if the
collected amount is lesser than the settlements amount as on date or month end settlements date
without selecting above said reasons.

The above said parameter may help us in following way:-

a. Further analysis of deviation contracts closure.

b. Suppose maximum closure comes through PDC short, then concerns reason need to take pre –caution
& required system to be put.
c. If deviation comes through maximum customer death, then compulsory single MLS to be introduced in
concern regions… etc.
In short through this parameter, we may address the root cause of deviation & block the leakage of
revenue or at least be aware about leakage.

There are few constraints challenges like speed of module, availability of proper scanner in branches,
availability of link in the branches, power shortage etc.

ANOTHER FEEDBACK

Now days we are focusing more on CCT terms for collecting the maximum NFI in the branches to
improve our retail income as well as PBT, but there are some genuine reason to provide the waiver
off in AFC, AIC ,CRA charges etc., but same time some emotional & prestige's decisions we are
taking to give the waiver off but all the reasons are not measurable , since we have not any facilities
to comprise all the reason of waiver off & amount ,which we have waived branch wise, Its has been
also observed that maximum time of BA are on filling the waiver off format to get the waiver from
the appropriate authority & also the authority mail box getting full due to yen no. of request for
waiver off as well as attachment .., My suggestion is if the same will implement through the WEB
that can certainly help us to save the time & find out the reason of waiver off, the following could
be advantages if the same will implement through WEB :-

1. The Format of waiver request could be same on WEB , only contract no. have to put in system
the other detail will come automatically that will help us to avoid the unnecessary duplicating the
work for typing & calculating the amount.

2. Authentication of data, the data come through the web more authenticated than which generated
by the manual working & the same time minimization of risk of any data tempering.

3. We can also list down the some of the frequent reason which arises for waiver off like AIC,
Customer is not able to pay due to xyz reason, Matured contract settlement, delay deposition of
PDC, Customer background is criminal , lawyer, police etc.

4. The frequent reason arises in branch as per list; we can take the some measurement to make the
necessary correction in future like if customer background or delay deposition of PDC is frequent
reason, we can take the corrective step immediately.

5. We can also fix the limit for waiver off amount in branch, that can be 10% or 20% of AFC,AIC
collection of last month , the net waiver amount we can also get for any particular branch, region or
zone wise through capturing the data on system against collection of AFC, AIC in particular period
, that could also lead the pressure on team for asking of any waiver off if there are not sufficient
collection of AFC,AIC.

6. Recording the deviation approval will be more easier, e.g if ZM have given the approval for
waiver by putting the certain remark with particular contract that can be viewable by any one by
putting the contract no. in web, it will help to mentors & team leader at the time of closing the
contracts by getting the authenticate mailer approval through system.
7. it will also reduce the paper work for taking the print out for, records & audit purpose & also
make the more responsible , answerable of approving authority for any waiver.

Sir, my suggestion only, there must be certain pro & cons while the same implementing on Macro
level.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by YADAV SUNIL M (24003458)

While checking the CSS creation for contract number B0009836 below error is shown. The error came in
Contract details option.

Ashish: - please check and confirm.

User: - Please find below some of the observations/concerns on CSS Mahanidhi

1. It is assume that CSS creation rights will be at Branch. In CSS creation the AFC rate field can be
changed. Default rate coming as 36 % but it can be reduced to Zero. If an accountant puts the rate as
Zero the AFC amount will be Zero in the CSS. He may proceed with submission to RA/ZA. While
approving CSS the R A will not see any AFC amount. Hence he will not notice that there is a deviation in
this case. This way B A will have full AFC waiver. Please check.

2. In closure entry amount over & above the principal amount is getting booked in Profit & loss account.
In current SN module excess amount will be booked in AFC, Additional charges & remaining amount will
be booked as Profit. Please check attached screen shot of contract number 2512883. In this contract
there is excess balance of 10875. Of which AFC should have been booked for Rs 1794/- but in Mahanidhi
entire amount is booked as P&L.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by MANJREKAR SMITA (24000056)

While doing the checking in CSS submission Menu, I am facing problem, below screen is coming, and not
going further.

I am trying this from Yogesh Id i.e. 24003618.

As from my ID, invalid password message is shown.

Bhavesh: - Please check and confirm for CSS Submission and Use your Old Live Password to Login in
Mahanidhi for testing purpose as the data is available till 3rd Feb, 2014 only.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by MANJREKAR SMITA (24000056)

In the below said screen Report is not running

Further BIRR & CIRR display required on the screen.

Bhavesh: - Please check now and confirm.
As per CG BIRR and CIRR not to be disclosed.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by BANGERA VISHWANATH S (24003457)
Mahanidhi CSS testing done for Agr no- 2576161. (Please find the snap shot with following
observation).
Suggest & guide …for the observation.

Observation: - In contract details: - Customer care Query data not capturing properly for mobile no ,
Road Name, Taluk code and Business Executive details.
CSS CREATION:- ADD

Observation: - In closure type – It is allowing to process for both TYPE “Preclusive & Refinance case”.
Observation: - Closure reasons should be unique (drop down required)
Observation: - Required option to view LJV to confirm accounting portion.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by AMIT PANJABI (24010314)

Please check MAHANIDHI module not available.

Shailesh: - You are checking in Live link,

Mahanidhi Testing is provided in below link (Further details are available in trail mail, Plz go through
before testing)
Test URL: http://172.30.0.16:7020/Emlap

1. Please check ….unable to understand why and what is the difference between settlement total
and Net settlement price?
 2. Because of below error MN is not allowing to process closure..need to check for solution to avoid
any problem in live environment.

3. There should not be any difference in Net settlement price and CCBAL.

Amardeep Sir: - Please check above point and confirm.

Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by SATHYAN SUNIL – MMFSL & ABHILASH B (24000227
& 24003561)
Please confirm while initiating closure process PL linked is not reflecting

While taking pre-closure working also PL linked also should reflect so that customer can be intimated
before collecting closure amount.
We will enable this.

Personal Loan Linked contracts not showing any message (getting normal closing figure as per SN)

Closing: 1544404

Customer had paid all the installments without any delay (AFC is zero). But actual IRR showing 11.11%w
where as Branch IRR is 12.1%.
As per below screen shot. You are comparing branch IRR of SN with IRR of Mahanidhi where both are
not the same fields, i.e., Mahanidhi IRR is not the branch IRR

CONTRACT No: 1718569.

ONLY PRINCIPAL OUTSTANDING IS COMING AS DEFAULT – required ‘TRUE IRR METHOD ALSO

IN CLOSURE ENTRY BRANCH IRR IS NOT REFLECTING

STTLEMENT REPORT ALSO BRANCH IRR NOT REFLECTING

In settlement working.

1. True IRR method is not reflecting.

2. Branch IRR is not reflecting.

In closure entry & settlement report also Branch Irr is not there.
As per CG’s Confirmation, by default Closure method will be “Principal Outstanding” only, and IRR not to
disclose.
Also in SN now the closure irr is showing less – general due to the reason that 1 emi is not considered in
cashflow.
Plz do not cross check Mahanidhi with SN live, instead check with Report server.
Many of the approval case were deviations are there correct branch irr & closure irr is required.
We dint received any confirmation form CG’s on the Deviation process.
Also confirm as per the earlier mail both the options will be enabled.

Initiating closure process PL linked is not reflecting – While taking pre-closure working also PL linked also
should reflect so that customer can be intimated before collecting closure amount.
This is done, check and confirm. (As said earlier, this will be enabled, and we will revert once it is done.)

Shailesh: - In Settlement Working Sheet: you can view the PL contract no if linked to the said contract
and you can also proceed further.

In CSS Creation : you cannot proceed with CSS creation if any PL contract no is linked to the said
contract.
User: - While Submitting CSS an error message is reflecting

Error message

Shailesh: - This is done, plz check and confirm.

Sunil Sathyan: - 1213881 is bad debt contract is there a way to take back dated closure details with prior
to marking of contract as most critical.
From settlement working sheet we should be able to access SOA & principal interest break up.
Additional AFC is also coming – I want to check the cash flows for IRR calculation –please revert with
options.

True IRR is not activated.

The report option is not having any details.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by NAIR VENUGOPAL (24000043)

Feedbacks with respect to closure module:

1.afc rate: the user is allowing decreasing AFC rate but not allowed to increase AFC rate.
This is done in settlement working sheet, and in CSS we have fixed to 36.
2.while closing matured contract, if the contract is having only AFC to recover , the amt is getting
transfered to profit and loss account while passing the closure entry .(refer screen shot).
This is done, check and confirm.
3. Print to file option is not available in settlement working.
Working on the same, Will update once it is done.
4. In the settlement working report – AFC calculation is not coming due date wise.
Plz discuss.
5. Branch irr (BIRR) and contractual irr (CIRR) display not available.
As per CG BIRR and CIRR not to be disclosed.
CCBAL should be Zero
Installment no. should be in Order & Print Option required to print to File & Direct to Printer
User: - 1. Memo entries (travelling exp cr.) are considered while preparing settlement working as shown
below. In this case we are giving benefit to customer as this amt is collected on account travelling
expand the same is credited in travelling exp a/c.
Please ignore this amt.
It is only displaying travelling exp amt, but not considered while preparing settlement working.
Feedback of a RA on travelling expenses.

It is good to see that, the amount collected towards “Travelling Expenses” is not considering in
settlement
2. The below message is displayed at branch and regional level. Closure entry is getting passed at head
office not at branch/region level, the message should be css approved only at branch/region level.
Closure entry we are passing at CSS submission level to avoid any account related entry for CSS created
Contract & approval is happening at HO level and after only approval accounting entries will be done.

3. Also please check when the branch submits the css, system should pop up message with respect to
future pdc/ecs, and the same should be tagged as: given back to customer or Hold”.
Please give the Message content.
Ved Bharti: - The Parking charges detail is not available in Mahanidhi Settlement working sheet.
Shailesh: - Plz Test CSS (Mahanidhi) in Below Link which is linked with M5000 (holds One day prior data).
And you can cross check the same with SN live
http://172.30.1.100:8080/Universal232
User & Pwd will be same as SN live.
Rights are given to HO Mentors group.
Request you to provide the consolidate Testing feedback as a single document so that we can sort out
issues if any within time.
Note: This Link will be not be available from 8:00Pm to 9:00Am. Since data restoration happens daily
8:00pm

Yogesh Gavhale: - Following points are observed – closure module testing

1. In customer care enquiry module – Quick link & Communication center is not working.
2. Blank data showing in settlement working sheet report.
3. In SN – Amount is adjusted in AFC whereas in Mahanidhi the same is booked in profit and loss
account.
4. Branch IRR& Actual IRR – At RA/ZM Approval level - Branch IRR is not showing in Mahanidhi &
Actual IRR differ between Sarvanidhi & Mahanidhi, although settlement amount is matching.
5. In Disposal closure - while checking a sample case Actual IRR is showing as 99% where as in SN it
is showing as 26.82%.

Shailesh: - Comments are updated in attached doc, check and confirm the same.

Yogesh Gavhale: - As per your remarks below queries are resolved but We have checked some sample
cases today it is still showing same status

1. In customer care enquiry module – Quick link & Communication center is not working.
2. Blank data showing in settlement working sheet report.
3. In SN – Amount is adjusted in AFC whereas in Mahanidhi the same is booked in profit and loss
account.
As discussed, share the contract no and screen shot of SN and Mahanidhi.

VenuGopal: - Contract no/1591840.

1. In SN – Amount is adjusted in AFC whereas in Mahanidhi the same is booked in profit and loss account
Shailesh: - We have resolved this point and reverted yesterday, and checked today also It is adjusting
with AFC only.
Plz check once again and confirm
Yogesh Gavhale: - Please find the below print screen where Mahanidhi system is booking entire amount
in profit & loss account and in SN it is accounting in AFC & CRA head.
Shailesh: - Since amount is available in INSURANCE-MLS CLAIM RECEIVABLE, CCBL amount will come
wrong. (Now we have included this a/c also).
As per the below mail, we have requested to provide a/c’s that has to be included for validating a
contract before CSS creation.
Kindly revert on the below. And also confirm on the -ve AFC balance cases

Please revert back on same.

Shailesh: - Below query is addressed, check and confirm the same. And we have removed the validation
for code ICRVB1 (INSURANCE-MLS CLAIM RECEIVABLE) which was said in attached mail.
Shailesh: - And on remaining above two points. As of now reports are connected to UAT server, will
change to M5k and update you.

Yogesh Gavhale: - If there is credit balance in insurance account, then the system should automatically
adjust the accounting entry & in case of debit balance - system should show below pop-up message.

2 Points are observed in Settlement working report which is as follow: -

1. In Mahanidhi settlement working report Guarantor details is not capturing & Installment Arrear
is showing as “Zero” whereas in SN it is showing as “2”. (Refer below Print screen).
a. Mahanidhi settlement working.
b. SN Settlement working report.
2. In Mahanidhi Last 6 receipt details is showing, in which it is capturing only EMI part – (For Eg –
Receipt number 926066668 total amount is Rs.206510/- dt : 10/04/2014 but in mahanidhi it
capturing only EMI part i.e. 10240/- only).
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by ILLAL RAVINDRA (24000045)
Feedback with respect to closure module.

1) In the first screen system allows to enter 28-02-2014 date. Pls note there is a payment made on 5th
of march2014
as discussed, Data in this server it is upto 3rd Feb. only. And same was shown, and agreed by you.
2) Our settlement wkg date is 05th of March but system takes 20th march 2014 i.e. current date.
As Discussed with you, AFC calculation is based on the Settlement date, and same was shown,
and agreed by you.
3) In settlement wkg screen settlement wkg date to be displayed.
4) Alignment of “Instl no” in afc wkg. Here afc is calculated till date instead of settlement wkg date.
5) instead of “Future installment receivable” we require the following
Principal outstanding - Future principal
Principal outstanding – Intervening charges
Principal outstanding – Penalty charges.
Memo – Cheque return charges

6) AFC rate is not displayed.

We are working on report finishing part.
We are in the process of checking different cases and will revert back to you.

Payment made on 5th of March – hence should not allow to close before 5th march
SETTLEMENT DATE (DISPLAY) REQUIRED.

Settlement Date wkg is on 05-03-2014 but system displays 20-03-2014

Alignment of “instl no” in afc wkg- finding it difficult to reconcile- FURTHER AFC IS CALCULATED TILL 20-
03-2014 INSTEAD OF 05-03-2014(PRECLOSURE WKG DATE).

Instead of future installment receivable we require –

Principal outstanding - Future principal
Principal outstanding – Intervening charges
Principal outstanding – Penalty charges.
Memo – Cheque return charges

AFC rate is not displayed.

Mismatch in installment arrear and other parameters.

 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by MANJREKAR SMITA (24000056)

While doing the checking, following points observed, please check and revert on the same.

1. While Balance amt Transfer (PCL/CCB), if we want to transfer the amt to P&L, after making zero in
CCBAL, BAL should directly flow to P&L, here we need to type the amt. Right now have to type manually.
(This facility is there in SN).
Validation is available , you need to enter the amount.

2. For cont no. 1967817, reposes charge are showing as 16000 /- , but actual Repo charges are Rs.8000/-
. Sarvanidhi Sett screen sh attached. Parking charges not considered, actually as per Sn it is 18000/-
You are Cross checking in SN live, even after informing many times.
Repo charges are corrected, check and confirm.
Parking charges are also considered in Mahanidhi CSS, since it is not available in UAT server, it is not
coming.
3. LOSS Amt is tallying with the LJV entries closed as of 17/2/14 for cont no. 2027289 in SN and
Mahanidhi – Data OK
4. For cont no. 904639
For cont no. 904639 , which is matured case memo charges for repoess is showing 3500/- but closure
entry is passing rs. 1889 as repoess charges in closure.
This is done, check and confirm.
For cont no. 904639, which is matured case memo charges for reposes is showing 3500/- but closure
entry is passing rs. 1889 as reposes charges in closure Screen short attached.

All the screen shorts are attached in the enclosed file.

 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by CHUDASAMA SANJAY (24003499)

Observation of Mahanidhi module.

1. LJV entries generated inspite of no accouting entries for AFC /add AFC / Memo addl int chgs / chq
rtn chgs.
You are chaecking with Live data, cross check with SN report server.

2. Matured credit balance case where CCB amount should be net settlement price after adjusting AFC
and Cheque bouncing charges. But in below screen shot the ccb balance is showing AFC amount
Rs.13329 instead of Rs.3533 excess amount.
Plz discuss
This is addressed , check and confirm.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by GOWDA YOGRAJ (24000014)

1. In case of disposal, even after the Contract Status is “repo released” ; system is not allowing to go to
next screen for closure.
This is done .Pls Check and Inform.

2. CCBAL calculation is coming correct, but when tried passing JVR through SN 16 for debiting the SOA
for increasing the closed contract balance we are unable to check.
As discussed and shown to you it is not coming in SN Also.
3. Insurance claim received is not reflecting in settlement working. Currently it is not available in SN, but
we were told it will be available in new system, please incorporate.
We will discuss this Requirement with CG.
Plz provide a contract no for such case.
Yograj: - Contract no 1858906, 1754027, 366340, and 3056893.
Amardeep Sir & Shailesh: - Insurance Premium Payable & RC Deposit Validation added in CSS creation.
Insurance Premium Payable & RC Deposit Validation added in CSS creation.
Plz confirm if any other a/c’s to be included.
4. In below mention screen shot, after making NIL “balance amount transfer to CCBAL “i.e. “0” the
amount should auto pick the amount in Balance Amount Transfer to P & L account which right now
needs to be done.
This are cases checked on random basis we will get back to you, by checking various combinations of
subvention, sd.
Validation is Available. You Should Have to Enter Amount Manually.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PHOTANI NARESH-MMFSL (24004325)

1. REPORTS NOT AVAILABLE FOR SETTLEMENT PRICE WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR DISPOSAL CASE FOR
LITIGATION PURPOSE.

2. CCB BALANCE DOES NOT MATCH WITH SETTLEMENT PRICE. REFINANCE PROPOSAL WITH OLD
CONTRACT BALANCE DEDUCTION WILL HAVE PROBLEM

3. SETTLEMENT WORKING SHEET DOES NOT ALLOW TO CALCULATE BELOW 36% AFC.
4. PDC ENTRY FOR MATURED CASES SHOULD NOT ALLOWED IN MAHANIDHI.IT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by ANIT CHOUDHARY (23069753)

AFC module not accepting AFC rate more than 50%.

Get the confirmation on afc rate value from cg after that we will increase the value.

We cannot generate settlement working on “Discount Method” & “True Rate IRR” as option
available in SN.
As per CG’s Confirmation, by default Closure method will be “Principal Outstanding” only, and IRR not to
disclose.

New Module added - CSS Closure Process & CSS approval by RA/ZA.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by SANGHVI PRATIK (24003502)

While going through the Settlement working sheet there is no where mentioned that from which mode
money is collected. One link regarding FMQ of that contract should be required so that before providing
settlement working to customer, branch can check his last payment status (either received by cash or
chq.) & received by chq then clearance can be check.

For doing Top Up case: -

If there is anything pending in part of AFC & we need to do top up & want to adjust pending amount
from new finance then system is not allowing parking that amount in CCBalance. Screen shot is
attached. Secondly if Top up is going to be done then in CCBalance is going to be transferred is only
principal amount & not full Ptr amount. Screen shot is attached below this.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by VYAS PARITOSH (24003914)

Process for two RHP no.2006820 & 558878. And my observations are as follows.

In CSS working – True IRR working is also required.

As per CG’s confirmation Only Principle Outstanding closure method is considered.

There is no approval authority. Suggested to provide authority matrix in system for deviation in
Installment arrears, Principle, Penalty on principal amount and AFC/ Other charges.
Yet to receive the deviation matrix from CG’s. And this will be considered in second phase.

Branch IRR & Earned IRR not reflecting in working which is required.
Now Branch IRR is provided in Closure entry and settlement working sheet. And Earned IRR is already
available; refer to ‘Actual IRR Net of P&L’ in Closure entry tab.

Suggesting adding Dedupe in NOC processing which help in finding out multiple contracts in our system.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by MALANI MEHUL-MMFSL (24001379)
Query

1. Receipt transfer takes so much time.

We are working on the speed related issues, will update on the same

2. Settlement sheet shows higher amount of closure than Sarvanidhi.

Plz do not check Mahanidhi data with SN live data, instead check with SN report server.

3. NOC issuance recording, NOC restriction modules are not available.

It is in development.

4. Contract sub status marking module is not available.

5. Transfer HHD active receipt module takes so much time than SN.
We are working on the speed related issues , will update on the same.

Feedback & Suggestion: -

1. Some of the modules are very good in closure module like all details in one click.

2. In Challan generation query, we can see all PDC listed & generated at once. (Not available in SN)

3. Invoice, Insurance & RC upload modules are very good but if we upload from this module, it should
automatically be transferred to EMLAP Worksheet.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by AGARWALLA ROHIT (24004088)

Settlement W/s - agmt no. 719738 error

Amardeep Sir: - Please check it now.

User: - Its fine now.

Spelling error!!!
Can’t we combine these two tabs?
We should be able to browse directly to Settlement Sheet after entering the contract no.
Even it takes lot of time if we want to come back from Settlement Working tab to Enter Contract no. tab

Amardeep: - Based on the first tab value we are enabling some fields & used in calculation also.

User: - More spelling errors –

CSS creation - Matured case – Receipt details not appearing.
Agmt no.

1483045 B.R. TAMANG SONS GUWAHATI - ASSAM

Bhavesh - Receipt Details is under process and the same will be available in 2nd phase.

User: - There was a credit of Rs 100 in this customer’s settlement a/c which is not appearing in
Settlement Working.
Go thru the one more screenshot below - in SN it appears.
Bhavesh: - ’Settlement Price’ amount is displayed in Closure Balance of CSS Creation under ‘Preclosure
Control Account’.
Created this below CSS and opted for NEW transaction Option –

Header changes to this –

And on entering new contract no. directly this screen appears –

Amardeep: - The same has rectified now, please check.

User: - Its fine now.

CSS creation - FOR REFINANCE

This option seems to be applicable only for TOP UP cases.

If this is so, can we put the other validations for Top up cases also here?

Extract from Refinance policy:-

Type C- Top up finance:
All existing Borrowers who have paid up more than 50% of their total dues (agreement value) are
eligible for top-up loan, provided that the delinquency level have never exceeded 90 days, during the
tenure of the contract.
Top Up loan is not applicable for three-wheelers. For Three-wheeler Refinance, existing loan has to be
closed in system and fresh refinance case to be punched through appropriate prevailing scheme in
EMLAP

Amardeep Sir: - It should be a user level control.

User: - While browsing thru tabs, this screen appears for a while in the background.

Bhavesh: - It is working. Please check once connectivity.

User: - Ya it is working but every time you switch between tabs this screen with “ CONTINUE FOR NEW
TRANSACTION “ appears during transition.

Can we have one more option of REFUND CASE in this drop down menu?
The purpose is to have minimum access to CCB a/c with the BAs.
At present if you see, the BAs can access CCB a/c in all the items of the drop down.
Whereas CCB access is actually required only in case of REFINANCE and REFUND cases.
By having REFUND CASE as a separate menu item, we can remove CCB access from MATURED and
PRECLOSURE option.

If closure type is selected as REFUND, CCB should allow only credit balance to be entered.
Similarly, if closure type is REFINANCE, CCB should allow only debit balance to be entered.
If this can be done, CCB option can be removed from “Matured contract” and “Preclosure” closure
types.
His will limit access to CCB at branch level.

Amardeep Sir: - Closure Type “Refund” has added ,now CCBAL & P&L will be editable in Closure Type
Refund & Refinance (Default Balance will come in CCBAL) ,other than this CCBAL will be non editable
and balance will come in P&L.
Dear Venu,
As discussed please note this point.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by HARIKANT KOTECHA (23072543)

In below mentioned link (http://172.30.0.16:7020/Emlap) – as tried and even verified by me – invalid

credentials is coming at all level – RA/TA/BA. Which earlier only under yours credentials we had tested
and reverted.

Further on trying other links – at TA & RA level - http://172.30.0.14:7054/Mahanidhi - in this link we are
able to check and cross verify – but required for BA also for testing for receipt generation and transfer.

Request to pls check and revert. For further testing and verification.

Shailesh: - http://172.30.0.16:7020/Emlap this is UAT link for testing Mahanidhi. For which rights are
given to RA/BA/AA/HO Mentors. Share the SAP codes of those who are not able to login into this link.
http://172.30.0.14:7054/Mahanidhi this is Live link of Mahanidhi. Plz don’t perform any testing in this
link.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by ADDAGATLA RADHAKISHAN (24003808)

Regarding the contract no. 2011457 in which balance in Insurance Claim Receivable
A/c.
For below said contract where receivable amount is 1171279/- and we have received
only rs.1064000/- hence there is no profit and amount directly booked towards AFC &
Memo- cheque Return charges.
Kindly go thru the comparison of closure in SN & Mahanidhi.
Shailesh: - All the queries that we have tested earlier in M5000 are now solved, check and confirm.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PUNJ PRAKASH & PANDEY ABHISHEK-faizabad
(24003761 & 24003446)

I have gone through the Settlement working of Mahanidhi and observation as follows:-

Settlement Working ---

1. Calculated due amount not correct like – CRA, AFC,
2. Report date taken by system automatically.
3. Closure matched also selected as Principal OS by default and not changeable.

CSS Creation ----

1- Not able to proceed further due to error msg “Billing is Pending as on date” whenever
due date of contract is 1st of every month.
Mahanidhi application is hanging and reflecting the msg”Loading – Pls wait “on very frequent
basis.
Screenshot of all pages attached in trail mail.
Only above mention observation captured on the bases of application available on Mahanidhi.
Punj Prakash to Abhishek Pandey:-

1. What is the diff in charges reflecting as per SN and Mahanidhi? Pl sends the details.
2. What is Report date? It will should ideally be today’s date as closure has been done today? Tell
the incidences/ situation which will not be addressed by this?

Abhishek Pandey: - Transaction head wise difference given below, with remark,
Settlement date should be changeable like S.N.
In this case Mahanidhi report date is reflected as-13-03-2014 (Screen shot given below.
For ex- suppose that customer came at branch for closing the contract after 10- 15 days, and
want to know the settlement amount ,in that situation we need to calculate the settlement post
30 days to avoid any difference in settlement.

Contract No- 2442205

 Top of Form Maha Nidhi SN Bal Remark
Account DescriptionBottom of Form Bal

Instalment Arrear 42618 21118 Difference in OD as on date

Principal Outstanding - Future Principal 371615 371615 ok

Principal Outstanding - Intervening Charges 1476 1475 1 Rs. Difference

Principal Outstanding - Penalty Charges 11193 11193 ok

NET AFC 10435 176 Difference in Due AFC, Deposited AFC not
adjusted

Memo - Cheque Return Charges 4500 0 Difference in Due CRA, Deposited CRA not
adjusted

TOTAL 441837 405577

Shailesh: - You are checking with the SN live , check with SN report server.

Srivastava Mrigank: - Checked 1 case RHP NO. 2522779, ASHOK KUMAR MISHRA

1. Last date is mismatch from SN.

2. IRR Okay.
There is a feedback on Last installment date mismatch coming in below contract.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PUNJ PRAKASH & KUMAR RUPESH-MMFSL
(24003761 & 24001152)

We have checked settlement working sheet two more required for closure method.

Closure method:- only showing principal outstanding,(1) discounting method (2) true irr.is necessary
required as per sn.

Punj Prakash: - We need to add atleast True IRR method of calculation.

Shailesh: - This is as per CG’s Confirmation, by default Closure method will be “Principal Outstanding”
only.
We have provided the Contractual and Closure IRR in Settlement Working Sheet. And fifth tab of CSS
creation, check this and confirm.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by MUTHAIAH ASHOK (24003626)

Herewith enclosed feedback for closure module.

Settlement working

 Mahanidhi application is easy to work and very fast compare than Sarvanidhi
 In Sarvanidhi we cannot view the PL details directly but Mahanidhi we can view PL details directly.
 Also settlement details of past and future date can view there itself.
 Mahanidhi AAFC amount shows would be wrong.
 In mahanidhi RC retention cases shows correctly
 Printing option not available in settlement working sheet.

CSS creation

 Three type of closer method in SN (Principal outstanding, Discount method & True rate IRR) But in
Mahanidhi default setting principal outstanding method only.
 Customer data can able to view easily compare than SN
 Very easy to view the CSS.
 There are seven stages to complete the CSS creation format.

CSS Submission

 All categories of CSS available in CSS submission (Disposal, Refinance, Mature contract closure, Pre Closure
& Refund) but no data found against the selection.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by SACHIN S. KADAM (24003492)

We have received, many mails received from regions & also checked in Mahanidhi module for AFC
balance is to be kept in CCBL or AFC waived…..instead of passing necessary entries in SN for keeping
balance in CCBL/AFC waived….can u please provide an option in mahanidhi only.

Earlier still the same problem is there is Closure module .In the case where we want to close the
contract with CCB and in Settlement AFC is there in that Case while processing the closure with the new
module ,Module left the AFC amount while parking in CCB.
In the below case AFC of Rs3463 is not reflecting in CCB Balance.
 Feedback on MAHANIDHI – CSS by PITHADIA HITESH (24000119)

1. Pre closure

Pre closure amount not shown in “closure

balance” box

2. Pre closure case

 Actual IRR – as per SN 36.59
whereas in Mahanidhi it is 99

3. Disposal contract is also allowed to be closed as Pre closure

4. Actual difference amount is 193754.01

5. Additional AFC
6. In closure type – there is no option for cancelled case. Which option to be
selected if TA adjustment is there and contract is cancelled?