5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DIVIDEND POLICY - …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/70593/16/16_chapter 5.pdf · dividend and firm size influence the dividend policy of a company.Megginson,195737

67

CHAPTER - 5

COMPARATIVE

ANALYSIS OF

DIVIDEND POLICY

68

CONTENT

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Analysis of selected Companies

5.2.1 Dabur India Ltd.

5.2.2 Nestle India Ltd.

5.2.3 Britannia Industries Ltd.

5.2.4 NTPC Ltd.

5.2.5 PowerGrid Ltd.

5.2.6 Tata Power

5.2.7 Cipla GlobalLtd.

5.2.8 Dr.ReddyLtd.

5.2.9 SunPharma Ltd.

5.2.10 Infosys

5.2.11 TCS Ltd.

5.2.12 Wipro Ltd.

5.2.13 HDFC Bank Ltd.

5.2.14 SBI

5.2.15 Axis Bank

5.2.16 Eicher Motors Ltd.

5.2.17 TVS Ltd.

5.2.18 Heromotocorp Ltd

5.2.19 JSW Steel Ltd.

5.2.20 Tata Steel Ltd.

5.2.21 Bhushan Steel

5.2.22 ACC Ltd.

5.2.23 Ambuja Cement Ltd.

5.2.24 J.K.Cement Ltd.

5.2.25 IDFC

5.2.26 Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Ltd.

5.2.27 J.M.Financial Ltd.

5.2.28 DLF Ltd.

5.2.29 NBCC Ltd.

5.2.30 JMC Projects Ltd.

5.3 Summary Details

69

5.1 INTRODUCTION

A number of researchers have advanced theories and provided empirical

evidence regarding determinants of a firm’s dividend policy. The dividend policy

issue, however, is yet unresolved.

There are many factors that could affect a firm’s dividend payout behaviour.

According to partington,198736

these reasons include profitability, stability

of dividend payout and retained earnings, liquidity and cash flows, investment

variables and financial variables. According to Lintner,1956,Rozeff 1992,and

Barclay 1995,investment opportunities, agency costs, financial leverage, last year’s

dividend and firm size influence the dividend policy of a

company.Megginson,195737

states that there are worldwide industrial patterns in

the dividend policy and important factors affecting the dividend payouts are

regulations, industry growth rate, capital investment needs, profitability, earnings

variability and asset characteristics such as the composition of tangible and

intangible assets.

Moreover research in the past also shows that there are significant

influence of growth rate of firm, systematic risk, retained earnings, liquidity,

cash availability, provision for tax and firm size on dividend payout.

In this chapter, issues related to dividend policies have been analysed

within many framework including profitability, growth rate, liquidity, leverage

and provision for taxation etc. The major focus of the research, however is to

find out whether there is dividend policy of all companies ,to know the

relationship between the variables and with dividend payout and the technique of

correlation matrix analysis is used for the purpose, the scope, methodology used

and interpretation of the result of correlation matrix are presented after

discussion and an analysis of the impact of least related variable on the dividend

policy of a firm, that has either been made by merely observing the data of

the selected companies or hereby to go further analysis to know the extent of

impact of least correlated variable on dividend payout simple regression analysis has

been run. Based on application of correlation matrix least correlated variable has been

36

Partington, G. H. (1987). Variables influencing dividend policy in Australia:Survey Results.

Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 16, p.165-182. 37

Megginson, W. (1997). In Corporate Finance Theory,Reading,Addison-Wesley ( p.355).

70

found. Least correlated variable refers low value (correlation coefficient). The study

is based on five years data of thirty selected companies of ten industries. The

period concerned is from 2007-2012. For the purpose of simple regression

analysis, dividend payout rate, which is defined as the ratio of dividends per

share for the firms dividend policy is as under:

Dividend Payout Ratio:

It measures the relationship between dividends and earnings.i.g. What

percentage shares of dividend is to be distributed from profit. It is to be calculated,

D/P Ratio = Dividend Per Share *100

Earnings per Share

The factors or explanatory variables are considered for the study purpose

are as under:

1) Liquidity:

Although dividend is related to earnings, the actual payment of dividend is

made from available cash. Thus, liquidity always plays an important role in any cash

payment by a firm. This usually happens in case of high growth firms or firm which

requires more funds for expansion purposes, which have very low liquidity because of

substantial investment like profitability, liquidity etc. Also has positive relationship

with dividend. Hence, greater the cash position and overall liquidity of a company,

greater is the ability to pay dividend.

The Current-Ratio is one of the best-known measures of financial strength and

liquidity. It is calculated as shown below:

Current-Ratio = Total Current-Assets

Total Current-Liabilities

2) Size and Growth:

Jahera, Lioud and Modani (1986) 38

find that size is the major factor that

determines a company’s policy. Big companies are usually in mature industries with

higher credit levels. Therefore, due to the fact that the cost of dividend policy is

relatively large companies have a stable dividend policy and moreover have a higher

payout than small companies. In order to study the influence of size on dividend.

Various measures such as Total Assets, Paid-up Capital, and Net worth etc. have been

38

Jahera, J. L. (1986). Growth,Beta and Agency Costs as Determinants of Dividend. Akron Business

and Economic Review 17, p.55-69.

71

used by researchers to represent size. James Bales said that many arguments may be

advanced against the use of any of the above measures for size. So, no measures are

perfect. Moreover, since all the above mentioned measures are correlated to each

other any measures may be used. Larger firms should be able to pay higher dividends.

Therefore expect to see the positive relationship between size and dividend payment.

Higher Growth companies have lots of investment opportunities and are likely to

pay low dividends because they have profitable uses for the capital. Therefore, high

growth companies prefer to capitalize on their favourable investment prospects and

have clear disincentive’s in paying operating cash flows and profits as

dividends.(Gaver and Gavert,1993)39

this ratio indicates the rate of growth of the total

assets in the business and is expressed in percentage.

3) Leverage:

A firm with large amounts of debts will follow a more conservative dividend

policy. The reason is that if a firm has relatively high financial leverage, its

dependence on external finance is increased. Therefore, such firms’ pay low

dividends to avoid borrowing i.e. a firm with higher leverage will pay a lower

fraction of earnings in order to lower its dependence on external financing leverage

can be calculated by Debt/Equity Ratio. The Debt/Equity or Leverage Ratio indicates

the extent to which the business is reliant on debt financing.

Debt/Equity Ratio =Long-term funds/Shareholder’s fund

4) Provision for Taxation:

In India, dividends were taxed in the hands of investors. Since investor did not

give significance to tax matter individual tax rates were irrelevant while determining

dividend policy in the Indian context. However, shareholders in the high tax bracket

may have preferred dividend income rather than capital gains. This is because, though

dividend income for the individual was free, capital gains are taxable in India.

Under the Finance Act 199740

, no tax was payable on dividends by a company

and consequently there was no withholding tax on dividends paid by a company to its

shareholders. However, a company declaring a dividend was required to pay income-

tax at the rate of 10% on the amount of dividend distributed. If, tax on dividends is

39

Gaver, J. a. (1993). Additional Evidence on the Association between Investment Opportunity Set

and Corporate Financing,Dividend and Compensation plocies . Journal of Accounting and

Economics, p.185-209 40

T.N.Pandey,Budget 1997:New Tax Concept Relating to Dividend Income, Chartered Secretary,

April 1997,p.365-366

72

viewed from point of view of the corporate sector, they have to pay dividend tax and

changes individual tax rates may influence the company’s dividend policy. For

Example, a cut in dividend tax from 20% to 10% on the dividend declared by

companies had been viewed as positive.

This variable shows that how much amount from profit is kept for payment of

tax. This is a provision from profit formula used for calculation of provision taxation

is,

= Amount provided for tax

Net Profit

5.2 ANALYSIS OF SELECTED COMPANIES

Hypothesis No-1

H0 = There is no significant influence of least related variable on dividend payout of

selected companies.

H1 = There is significant influence of least related variable on dividend payout of

selected companies.

Values for different variables are calculated for different companies which are as

follows:

5.2.1 DABUR INDIA LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE & GROWTH

(TOTAL ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 38.46 0.948818 31.19367 0.032815 13.25648

2008-09 41.96 1.121894 57.04753 0.191405 12.10353

2009-10 40.24 -1.06165 60.6 0.146824 17.77887

2010-11 49.24 1.512513 177.2301 0.347733 20.93885

2011-12 52.04 1.513449 17.97409 0.352974 21.08751

(Table 5.1: Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of DABUR INDIA

LTD.)

73

In order to know the correlation of different variables with dividend payout

above table is used and on the basis of that, below correlation matrix is as follows:

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .589 .282 .961**

.815

Sig. (2-tailed)

.296 .645 .009 .093

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .589 1 .173 .485 .118

Sig. (2-tailed) .296

.781 .408 .850

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .282 .173 1 .435 .387

Sig. (2-tailed) .645 .781

.464 .520

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation .961**

.485 .435 1 .794

Sig. (2-tailed) .009 .408 .464

.108

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .815 .118 .387 .794 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .093 .850 .520 .108

N 5 5 5 5 5

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

POSITIVE CORRELATION:

The correlation Matrix shows that dividend payout ratio is significantly and

strong positively correlated with leverage. It is also nearer to strong positively

correlated with provision for taxation. It is partially correlated with liquidity. It also

shows weak correlation with growth. Liquidity is weakly correlated with growth,

leverage and provision for taxation. Growth is also weakly correlated with leverage

and provision for taxation. Leverage is weakly correlated with liquidity and growth.

Leverage is also nearer to strong positively correlated with provision for taxation.

Considering above correlation matrix, least correlated value is 0.282 which

indicates that there is low correlation between dividend payout and growth. Simple

regression method is used in order to know the Influence of growth on dividend

payout which can be extracted from below table.

74

YEAR DIVIDEND PAYOUT SIZE & GROWTH(TOTAL ASSETS)

2007-08 38.46 31.19

2008-09 41.96 57.05

2009-10 40.24 60.6

2010-11 49.24 177.23

2011-12 52.04 17.97

TABLE 5.1.1: SIMPLE RERESSION ANALYSIS FOR DABUR INDIA LTD.

Output of Simple Regression

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .282a .080 -.227 6.56110

a. Predictors: (Constant),SG

The above table indicates that the value of R for Dabur India Ltd. 28.2% that

refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as growth

and the dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the company. The R2 value (the

"R Square" column) indicates how much of the total change in the dependent variable

can be explained by the independent variable. Value of adjusted R- Square for Dabur

India Ltd. is -0.227. It indicates that there is no change in dividend payout due to the

changes in growth.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 11.193 1 11.193 .260 .645b

Residual 129.144 3 43.048

Total 140.337 4

a. Dependent Variable: DPR

b. Predictors: (Constant), SG

75

The F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the overall regression model is

a good fit for the data. The above table shows that the independent variables

statistically significantly predict the dependent variable, F (1, 3) = 0.260, p >0.05 (i.e.,

the regression model is unfit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is accepted.

It means that there is no significant impact of size and growth on the dividend payout

for Dabur Company.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 42.566 4.624 9.206 .003 27.851 57.281

GR .026 .052 .282 .510 .645 -.139 .192


From the above table, the general form of the equation to predict dividend

payout from growth can be obtained as under:

Predicted dividend payout

= 42.566 + (0.026*growth)

Unstandardized coefficients indicate how much the dependent variable varies

with an Independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant.

In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to

026Which means for every additional increase in growth, dividend payout

increases by 0.026.

76

5.2.2 NESTLE INDIA LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE & GROWTH

(TOTAL ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 41.52 0.673967 13.56818 0.001727 30.89238

2008-09 71.39 0.602199 20.00081 #VALUE! 28.56924

2009-10 57.12 0.626476 44.91131 #VALUE! 28.50777

2010-11 48.63 1.143477 61.16 1.3033 30.72267

2011-12 43.79 1.0154 17.31337 1.243925 31.2186

(Table 5.2: Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of

NESTLE INDIA LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 -.525 .050 -.469 -.885*

Sig. (2-tailed)

.364 .936 .426 .046

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation -.525 1 .453 .983**

.710


.444 .003 .180

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .050 .453 1 .368 -.140

Sig. (2-tailed) .936 .444

.542 .822

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.469 .983**

.368 1 .675

Sig. (2-tailed) .426 .003 .542

.211

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation -.885* .710 -.140 .675 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .046 .180 .822 .211

N 5 5 5 5 5

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).


77


Dividend payout shows weak positive correlation with Growth ratio. Liquidity

and leverage are significant and strongly positively correlated. Liquidity is also partial

positive correlated with growth and provision for taxation. Growth and leverage are

also partially correlated. Leverage is also partially correlated with provision for

taxation.

NEGATIVE CORRELATION:

Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity, leverage and provision for

taxation. Growth and provision for taxation are negatively correlated.

Considering above correlation matrix least correlated value is -0.885 that

indicates low correlation between dividend payout and provision for taxation. Simple

regression method is used in order to know the Influence of provision for taxation on

dividend payout which can be extracted from below table.

YEAR DIVIDEND PAYOUT PROVISION FOR TAXATION

2007-08 41.52 30.89

2008-09 71.39 28.57

2009-10 57.12 28.51

2010-11 48.63 30.72

2011-12 43.79 31.22

TABLE 5.2.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR NESTLE INDIA

Output of simple regression

Model Summary


Estimate

1 .885a .782 .710 6.53942

a. Predictors: (Constant), PT

The above table indicates that the value of R for NESTLE INDIA LTD.88.5%

that refers there is a Positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

provision for taxation and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company.

78

Value of adjusted R- Square for Nestle India Ltd. is 0.710. It indicates that there is

71% change in dividend payout due to the changes in Provision for taxation.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 461.285 1 461.285 10.787 .046b

Residual 128.292 3 42.764

Total 589.577 4


b. Predictors: (Constant), PT

The above table shows that the independent variables statistically significantly

predict the dependent variable, F (1, 3) = 10.787, p <0.05 (i.e., the regression model is

fit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is rejected. It means that there is

significant impact of provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the NESTLE

INDIA LTD.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 294.570 73.766 3.993 .028 59.815 529.326

TX -8.074 2.458 -.885 -3.284 .046 -15.898 -.250



payout from provision for taxation can be obtained as under:


= 294.570 - (8.074*prov.for taxation)

Unstandardized coefficients indicate how much the dependent variable varies with

an Independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant.

79

In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for provision for taxation is

equal to-8.074. This means that for every additional in increase provision for

taxation, dividend payout decreases by 8.074.

5.2.3 BRITANNIAINDUSTRIES LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH(TOTA

L ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DEB

T-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-

08 22.51 1.589052 41.1866 0.140376 17.7632

2008-

09 52.97 1.304996 -0.67749 0.030517 22.41447

2009-

10 51.26 1.073139 -0.85606 1.0842 3.532209

2010-

11 53.44 0.647407 79.50668 1.275161 26.64344

2011-

12 54.37 1.141355 12.80616 0.332744 26.00547

(Table no.5.3: Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD.)

In order to know the correlation of different variables with dividend payout above

table is used and on the basis of that, below correlation matrix is as follows:

80

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.713 -.212 .395 .165

Sig. (2-tailed)

.177 .732 .511 .791

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.713 1 -.469 -.847 -.209


.425 .070 .736

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.212 -.469 1 .448 .478

Sig. (2-tailed) .732 .425

.450 .415

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .395 -.847 .448 1 -.257

Sig. (2-tailed) .511 .070 .450

.677

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .165 -.209 .478 -.257 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .791 .736 .415 .677

N 5 5 5 5 5


Dividend payout shows partial positive correlation with leverage and

provision for taxation. Liquidity is partially correlated with leverage and provision for

taxation. Leverage and growth are also partially correlated. Provision for taxation and

growth are also partially correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity and growth.

Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth, leverage and provision for taxation.

Growth and leverage are also negatively correlated.

81


indicates low correlation between dividend payout and liquidity. Simple regression

method is used in order to know the Influence of Liquidity on dividend payout which

can be extracted from below table.

YEAR DIVIDEND PAYOUT LIQUIDITY(CURRENT RATIO)

2007-08 22.51 1.59

2008-09 52.97 1.30

2009-10 51.26 1.07

2010-11 53.44 0.65

2011-12 54.37 1.14

TABLE 5.3.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR BRITANNIA LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .713a .508 .344 11.08297

a. Predictors: (Constant), LQ

The above table indicates that the value of R for BRITANNIA LTD. is 71.3%

that refers there is a Positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

liquidity and the dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for BRITANNIALTD. is 0.344. It indicates that there is 34.4%

change in dividend payout due to the changes in liquidity.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 380.802 1 380.802 3.100 .177b

Residual 368.497 3 122.832

Total 749.299 4


b. Predictors: (Constant), LQ

82


predict the dependent variable, F (1, 3) = 3.100, p >0.05 (i.e., the regression model is

unfit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is accepted. It means that there is

no significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the BRITANNIA LTD.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 79.492 19.157 4.149 .025 18.525 140.459

LQ -28.303 16.075 -.713 -1.761 .177 -79.460 22.854



payout from liquidity can be obtained as under:


= 79.492 - (28.303*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to -

28.303. This means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend

payout decreases by 28.303.

83

5.2.4 NTPC LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DEB

T-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 46 3.221831 10.47 0.516558 27.69505

2008-09 42 2.893298 16.055 0.602541 6.745018

2009-10 42 2.864418 8.017458 0.605362 24.65849

2010-11 42 2.572039 23.13398 0.632637 24.45643

2011-12 41 2.257266 12.00821 0.666903 25.16632

(Table no: 5.4 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of NTPC LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .826 -.259 -.955* .308

Sig. (2-tailed)

.085 .674 .011 .614

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .826 1 -.313 -.954* -.095


.608 .012 .879

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation -.259 -.313 1 .329 -.256

Sig. (2-tailed) .674 .608

.588 .678

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.955* -.954

* .329 1 -.107

Sig. (2-tailed) .011 .012 .588

.865

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .308 -.095 -.256 -.107 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .614 .879 .678 .865

N 5 5 5 5 5


84


Dividend pay-out shows strong positive correlation with liquidity. And it

shows partial correlation with provision for taxation. Growth and leverage are

partially correlated.


Dividend pay-out shows negative correlation with growth and leverage.

Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth, leverage and provision for taxation.

Growth is negatively correlated with liquidity and provision for taxation.


indicates low correlation between dividend pay-out and leverage. Simple regression

method is used in order to know the Influence of Liquidity on dividend pay-out which



2007-08 46 3.22

2008-09 42 2.89

2009-10 42 2.86

2010-11 42 2.57

2011-12 41 2.26

TABLE 5.4.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR NTPC LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .955a .912 .883 .66650

a. Predictors: (Constant), LV

The above table indicates that the value of R for NTPC LTD. is 95.5% that

refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

leverage and the dependent variable i.e. Dividend pay-out of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for NTPC is 0.883. It indicates that there is 88.3% change in

dividend payout due to the changes in leverage.

85

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 13.867 1 13.867 31.218 .011b

Residual 1.333 3 .444

Total 15.200 4


b. Predictors: (Constant), LV




significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the NTPC LTD.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 62.806 3.629 17.308 .000 51.258 74.354

LV -33.410 5.980 -.955 -5.587 .011 -52.439 -14.380



pay-out from leverage can be obtained as under:

Predicted dividend pay-out

= 62.806 - (33.410*leverage)

Unstandardized coefficients indicate how much the dependent variable varies with

an Independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant.

In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to -

33.410. This means that for every additional increase in leverage, dividend

payout decreases by 33.410.

86

5.2.5 POWER GRID LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 33.16 1.07005 19.73614 1.648134 12.01618

2008-09 33.16 1 20.4088 1.946458 24.13638

2009-10 30.93 0.953829 16.22362 2.158888 22.27723

2010-11 30.04 0.915628 41.61321 2.053105 29.4902

2011-12 30.01 0.623215 21.78231 2.356522 29.20835

(Table no: 5.5 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of POWERGRID

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .739 -.482 -.814 -.762

Sig. (2-tailed)

.154 .411 .094 .134

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .739 1 -.088 -.867 -.704


.888 .057 .185

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation -.482 -.088 1 .057 .520

Sig. (2-tailed) .411 .888

.927 .369

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.814 -.867 .057 1 .826

Sig. (2-tailed) .094 .057 .927

.085

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation -.762 -.704 .520 .826 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .134 .185 .369 .085

N 5 5 5 5 5

87


Dividend pay-out shows partial positive correlation with liquidity. Growth is

partially correlated with leverage and provision for taxation. Leverage and provision

for taxation are significant and strong positively correlated. And it is partially

correlated with growth.


Dividend pay-out shows negative correlation with growth, leverage and

provision for taxation. Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth, leverage and

provision for taxation.



method is used in order to know the Influence of Leverage on dividend pay-out which


YEAR DIVIDEND PAYOUT LEVERAGE(DEBT-EQUITY RATIO)

2007-08 33.16 1.65

2008-09 33.16 1.95

2009-10 30.93 2.16

2010-11 30.04 2.05

2011-12 30.01 2.36

TABLE 5.5.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR POWERGRID LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .814a .663 .550 1.06994


The above table indicates that the value of R for POWER GRID ltd. 81.4%

that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

leverage and the dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the company. Value of

88

adjusted R- Square for POWER GRID LTD. is 0.550. It indicates that there is 55%

change in dividend payout due to the changes in leverage.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 6.746 1 6.746 5.892 .094b

Residual 3.434 3 1.145

Total 10.180 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the POWER GRID LTD.

Coefficients

Dependent Variable: DPR

From the above table, the general form of the equation to predict

dividend payout from growth can be obtained as under:


= 41.499 - (4.939*leverage)


with an Independent variable when all other independent variables are held

constant. In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal

to4.939. This means that for every additional in increase leverage, dividend payout

decreases by 4.939.

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 41.499 4.163 9.968 .002 28.250 54.748

LV -4.939 2.035 -.814 -2.427 .094 -11.414 1.536

89

5.2.6 TATA POWER

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH(TO

TAL ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DEB

T-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 27.17 2.107667 0.407174 15.33292 10.30928

2008-09 26.32 2.260261 0.640981 25.54908 17.45748

2009-10 30.39 2.74631 0.587298 19.27169 25.417

2010-11 31.55 2.177834 0.696231 10.41667 15.3777

2011-12 27.59 1.323855 0.730604 36.18521 30.48128

(Table no: 5.6 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of TATA

POWER)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .390 .273 -.580 .071

Sig. (2-tailed)

.516 .657 .306 .910

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .390 1 -.378 -.640 -.330


.530 .244 .588

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .273 -.378 1 .443 .641

Sig. (2-tailed) .657 .530

.455 .243

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.580 -.640 .443 1 .753

Sig. (2-tailed) .306 .244 .455

.142

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .071 -.330 .641 .753 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .910 .588 .243 .142

N 5 5 5 5 5

90


Dividend pay-out shows partial positive correlation with liquidity and growth.

It shows weak correlation with provision for taxation. Growth is partial positive

correlated with liquidity and provision for taxation. Leverage is partially correlated

with growth and provision for taxation.


Dividend pay-out shows negative correlation with growth and leverage.

Liquidity ratio is negatively correlated with growth, leverage and provision for

taxation.



method is used in order to know the Influence of Leverage on dividend pay-out which



2007-08 27.17 15.33

2008-09 26.32 25.55

2009-10 30.39 19.27

2010-11 31.55 10.42

2011-12 27.59 36.19

TABLE 5.6.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR TATA POWER

Output of simple regression:

Model Summary


Estimate

1 .580a .336 .115 2.11277


The above table indicates that the value of R for TATA POWER is 58% that

refers there is a partial linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

leverage and the dependent variable i.e. dividend pay-out of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for TATA POWER is 0.115. It indicates that there is 11.5%

change in dividend pay-out due to the changes in leverage.

91

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 6.779 1 6.779 1.519 .306b

Residual 13.391 3 4.464

Total 20.170 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend pay-out of the TATA POWER.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 31.391 2.451 12.806 .001 23.590 39.192

LV -.131 .106 -.580 -1.232 .306 -.468 .207



pay-out from leverage can be obtained as under:


= 31.191 - (0.131*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to 0.131. This

means that for every additional increase leverage, dividend pay-out decreases by

0.131.

92

5.2.7 CIPLAGLOBAL LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE & GROWTH

(TOTAL ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 22.18 3 29.20507 0.154568 16.34845

2008-09 20.00 3.491736 21.60053 0.216055 13.76249

2009-10 14.85 3.584843 11.78735 0.000857 18.41509

2010-11 16.67 2.841776 38.53723 0.03569 16.59427

2011-12 14.23 4.067797 6.463068 0.034964 20.90077

(Table no: 5.7 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables CIPLA GLOBAL

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 -.576 .550 .859 -.758

Sig. (2-tailed)

.309 .337 .063 .138

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation -.576 1 -.963**

-.206 .589


.009 .740 .296

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .550 -.963**

1 .268 -.617

Sig. (2-tailed) .337 .009

.663 .267

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation .859 -.206 .268 1 -.786

Sig. (2-tailed) .063 .740 .663

.115

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation -.758 .589 -.617 -.786 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .138 .296 .267 .115

N 5 5 5 5 5


93


Dividend pay-out shows strong positive correlation with leverage. It shows

partial positive correlation with growth. Liquidity and provision for taxation are

partially correlated. Growth and leverage are partially correlated with leverage.


Dividend pay-out shows negative correlations with liquidity and provision for

taxation. Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth and leverage. Growth and

provision for taxation are negatively correlated. Leverage and provisions for taxation

are also negatively correlated.


indicates low correlation between dividend pay-out and provision for taxation. Simple

regression method is used in order to know the Influence of Provision for Taxation on

dividend pay-out which can be extracted from below table.


2007-08 22.18 16.35

2008-09 20.00 13.76

2009-10 14.85 18.42

2010-11 16.67 16.59

2011-12 14.23 20.90

TABLE 5.7.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR CIPLA LTD.

Output of Simple Regression

Model Summary


Estimate

1 .758a .575 .433 2.56805


The above table indicates that the value of R for CIPLA LTD. is 75.8% that

refers there is a Positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

provision for taxation and the dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the

company. Value of adjusted R- Square for CIPLA LTD. is 0.433. It indicates that

there is 43.3% change in dividend payout due to the changes in Provision for taxation.

94

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 26.735 1 26.735 4.054 .138b

Residual 19.785 3 6.595

Total 46.520 4


b. Predictors: (Constant), PT




no significant impact of provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the CIPLA

LTD.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 34.373 8.416 4.084 .027 7.589 61.157

TX -.976 .485 -.758 -2.013 .138 -2.518 .567





= 34.373 - (0.976*provision for taxation)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for provision for taxation is equal to

0.976. This means that for every additional increase in provision for taxation,

dividend payout decreases by 0.976.

95

5.2.8 DR.REDDY LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH(TOT

AL ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DEB

T-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 13.35 3.850041 12.60179 0.096078 18.64069

2008-09 18.88 3.25057 11.72978 0.121751 23.11172

2009-10 22.59 2.146451 9.399312 0.095222 22.00406

2010-11 21.42 1.402888 41.36552 0.106226 15.06797

2011-12 25.67 1.607844 11.62856 0.083435 27.5413

(Table no: 5.8 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables

DR.REDDY LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 -.879* .076 -.365 .506

Sig. (2-tailed)

.049 .903 .546 .385

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation -.879* 1 -.508 .342 -.061


.382 .573 .922

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .076 -.508 1 .231 -.743

Sig. (2-tailed) .903 .382

.709 .150

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.365 .342 .231 1 -.354

Sig. (2-tailed) .546 .573 .709

.559

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT


Sig. (2-tailed) .385 .922 .150 .559

N 5 5 5 5 5


96

POSIVIVE CORRELATION:

Dividend payout ratio shows weak correlations with growth and partial

correlations with provision for taxation. Liquidity and leverage are weakly correlated

whereas growth and leverage are also weakly correlated.


Dividend payout ratio shows negative correlation with liquidity and leverage.

Liquidity, growth and provision for taxation are negatively correlated. Provision for

taxation and leverage are also negatively correlated.






2007-08 13.35 3.85

2008-09 18.88 3.25

2009-10 22.59 2.15

2010-11 21.42 1.40

2011-12 25.67 1.61

TABLE 5.8.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR DR.REDDY LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .879a .773 .698 2.54408


Th0.e above table indicates that the value of R for DR.REDDY LTD. is 87.9%

that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as


adjusted R- Square for DR.REDDY LTD. is 0.698. It indicates that there is 69.8%


97

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 66.204 1 66.204 10.229 .049b

Residual 19.417 3 6.472

Total 85.621 4





fit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is rejected. It means that there is no

significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the DR.REDDY LID.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 29.786 3.153 9.447 .003 19.752 39.821

LQ -3.836 1.199 -.879 -3.198 .049 -7.653 -.019





= 29.786 - (3.836*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to 3.836. This

means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout decreases by

3.836.

98

5.2.9 SUNPHARMA LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 14.03 2.836518 10.01318 0.02436 3.630489

2008-09 22.51 2.991477 19.65418 0.004581 2.323607

2009-10 31.6 2.780125 10.77772 0.005159 5.32027

2010-11 26.12 5.966569 29.74347 0.020867 4.828061

2011-12 25.93 3.898773 20.04312 0.029779 1.639819

(Table no: 5.9 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of

SUNPHARMA LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY


Sig. (2-tailed)

.716 .692 .532 .586

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .225 1 .905* .398 .199


.035 .507 .749

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .244 .905* 1 .210 -.086

Sig. (2-tailed) .692 .035

.735 .891

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.377 .398 .210 1 -.340

Sig. (2-tailed) .532 .507 .735

.575

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .331 .199 -.086 -.340 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .586 .749 .891 .575

N 5 5 5 5 5


99


Dividend payout shows weak correlation with liquidity; growth and provision

for taxation. Liquidity and growth are significant and strong positively correlated.

Whereas liquidity, leverage and provision for taxation are weakly correlated. Growth

and leverage also weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with leverage. Provision for

taxation, growth and leverage are negatively correlated.


indicates low correlation between dividend payout and leverage. Simple regression

method is used in order to know the Influence of Leverage on dividend payout which



2007-08 14.03 0.02

2008-09 22.51 0.00

2009-10 31.6 0.01

2010-11 26.12 0.02

2011-12 25.93 0.03

TABLE 5.9.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR SUNPHARMA LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .377a .142 -.144 6.92298


The above table indicates that the value of R for SUN PHARMA LTD. is 37.7% that

refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as


adjusted R- Square for SUN PHARMA LTD. is -0.144. It indicates that there is no


100

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 23.810 1 23.810 .497 .532b

Residual 143.783 3 47.928

Total 167.593 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the SUN PHARMA LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 27.641 5.977 4.625 .019 8.621 46.661

LV -212.590 301.617 -.377 -.705 .532 -1172.472 747.291



payout from leverage can be obtained as under:


= 27.641 - (212.590*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to 212.590.

This means that for every additional increase in leverage, dividend payout decreases

by 212.590.

101

5.2.10 INFOSYS

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 16.94 6.703399 20.85648 #VALUE! 12.35294

2008-09 23.12 4.718003 25.29 #VALUE! 13.33035

2009-10 24.91 4.457346 24.77866 #VALUE! 22.97912

2010-11 41.87 5.282334 29.57607 0.00102 26.95839

2011-12 43.14 4.880819 24.1249 0.000706 28.02812


INFOSYS)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.376 .652 .933

* .906

*

Sig. (2-tailed)

.533 .233 .021 .034

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.376 1 -.500 -.090 -.473


.391 .885 .421

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .652 -.500 1 .689 .582

Sig. (2-tailed) .233 .391

.198 .303

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .933

* -.090 .689 1 .795

Sig. (2-tailed) .021 .885 .198

.108

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .906

* -.473 .582 .795 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .034 .421 .303 .108

N 5 5 5 5 5


102


Dividend payout shows significant strong positive correlations with leverage

and provision for taxation. It shows partial correlation with growth. Growth, leverage

and provision for taxation are partially correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity. Liquidity, Growth

and provision for taxation are negatively correlated.






2007-08 16.94 6.70

2008-09 23.12 4.72

2009-10 24.91 4.46

2010-11 41.87 5.28

2011-12 43.14 4.88

TABLE 5.10.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR INFOSYS


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .376a .141 -.145 12.63098


The above table indicates that the value of R for INFOSYS is37.6% that refers

there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as liquidity and

the dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the company. Value of adjusted R-

Square for INFOSYS is -14.5. It indicates that there is no change in dividend payout

due to the changes in liquidity.

103

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 78.738 1 78.738 .494 .533b

Residual 478.625 3 159.542

Total 557.363 4



The above table shows that the independent variables statistically

significantly predict the dependent variable, F (1, 3) = 0.494, p >0.05 (i.e., the

regression model is unfit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is accepted. It

means that there is no significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the

INFOSYS LTD.

.Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 56.026 37.481 1.495 .232 -63.255 175.307

LQ -4.998 7.114 -.376 -.703 .533 -27.638 17.642




Predicted dividend pay out

= 56.026 - (4.998*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to -4.998.This

means that for every additional increase liquidity, dividend payout decreases by

4.998.

104

5.2.11 TCS LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 31.9 2.040646 36.40147 0.001636 9.892086

2008-09 30.5 1.887053 21.94903 0.003049 8.638132

2009-10 32.7 1.489709 11.78808 0.002381 11.78964

2010-11 35.2 1.71814 71.42575 0.015935 12.98851

2011-12 37.2 1.871647 31.54782 0.022811 17.88119

(Table no: 5.11 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of TCS

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.122 .431 .945

* .967

**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.845 .469 .015 .007

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.122 1 .168 .023 -.133


.787 .971 .831

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .431 .168 1 .488 .192

Sig. (2-tailed) .469 .787

.404 .758

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .945

* .023 .488 1 .905

*

Sig. (2-tailed) .015 .971 .404

.034

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .967

** -.133 .192 .905

* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .831 .758 .034

N 5 5 5 5 5



105


Dividend payout is significant and strong positively correlated with leverage

and provision for taxation. Dividend payout is weakly correlated with growth.

Liquidity, growth and leverage are weakly correlated. Growth, leverage and provision

for taxation are also weakly correlated. Leverage shows significant and strong

positive relationship with provision for taxation.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity. Provision for

taxation and liquidity are negatively correlated.






2007-08 31.9 2.04

2008-09 30.5 1.89

2009-10 32.7 1.49

2010-11 35.2 1.72

2011-12 37.2 1.87

TABLE 5.11.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR TCSLTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .122a .015 -.314 3.07429


The above table indicates that the value of R for TCS LTD. is 12.2% that



adjusted R- Square for TCS LTD. is -0.314. It indicates that there is no change in

dividend payout due to the changes in liquidity.

106

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression .426 1 .426 .045 .845b

Residual 28.354 3 9.451

Total 28.780 4






no significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of TCS.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 36.323 13.363 2.718 .073 -6.205 78.850

LQ -1.567 7.379 -.122 -.212 .845 -25.049 21.915





= 36.323 - (1.567*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to -1.567. This

means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout Decreases by

1.567.

107

5.2.12 WIPROLTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 28.61 2.531767 61.46112 0.330866 11.71283

2008-09 19.71 1.82768 13.57925 0.400682 16.1814

2009-10 17.98 2.380132 32.4814 0.31261 13.901

2010-11 30.33 2.102958 46.92624 0.116087 15.10472

2011-12 31.43 2.16839 13.11878 0.102774 20.84108


WIPROLTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY


Sig. (2-tailed)

.781 .635 .127 .618

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .173 1 .697 -.003 -.527


.191 .997 .362

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .290 .697 1 .035 -.812

Sig. (2-tailed) .635 .191

.955 .095

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.770 -.003 .035 1 -.567

Sig. (2-tailed) .127 .997 .955

.319

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT


Sig. (2-tailed) .618 .362 .095 .319

N 5 5 5 5 5

108


Dividend payout shows weak correlation with liquidity, growth and provision

for taxation. Liquidity and growth are partially correlated. Growth and leverage are

weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with leverage. Provision for

taxation, liquidity, leverage and growth are negatively correlated.






2007-08 28.61 0.33

2008-09 19.71 0.40

2009-10 17.98 0.31

2010-11 30.33 0.11

2011-12 31.43 0.10

TABLE 5.12.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR WIPRO LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .770a .593 .458 4.62976


The above table indicates that the value of R for WIPRO LTD. is 77% that



adjusted R- Square for WIPRO LTD is 0.458. It indicates that there is 45.8% change

in dividend payout due to the changes in leverage.

109

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 93.874 1 93.874 4.380 .127b

Residual 64.304 3 21.435

Total 158.178 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the WIPRO LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 34.687 4.805 7.219 .005 19.394 49.979

LV -35.924 17.166 -.770 -2.093 .127 -90.555 18.706





= 34.687 - (35.924*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to -35.924.

This means that for every additional increase in leverage, dividend payout decreases

by 35.924.

110

5.2.13 HDFC BANK LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 18.48 0.267935 45.96998 6.646968 30.27453

2008-09 18.87 0.391362 37.61494 0.625661 31.95587

2009-10 17.78 0.288861 21.38237 0.600183 31.25193

2010-11 19.41 0.50361 24.67607 0.567223 32.52053

2011-12 19.46 0.580297 21.83391 0.796892 31.22604

(Table no: 5.13 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of HDFC

BANK LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .893* -.144 -.243 .472

Sig. (2-tailed)

.041 .817 .694 .422

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .893* 1 -.548 -.556 .532


.339 .330 .356

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG


Sig. (2-tailed) .817 .339

.109 .437

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.243 -.556 .793 1 -.785

Sig. (2-tailed) .694 .330 .109

.115

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .472 .532 -.459 -.785 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .422 .356 .437 .115

N 5 5 5 5 5


111


Dividend payout ratio shows significant and strong positive correlation with

liquidity. It also shows weak correlation with provision for taxation. Liquidity and

provision for taxation are partially correlated. Growth and leverage shows nearer to

strong positive correlation.


Dividend payout ratio shows negative correlation with growth and leverages.

Liquidity, Growth and Leverages are negatively correlated. Provision for taxation,

Growth and leverages are also negatively correlated.






2007-08 18.48 6.65

2008-09 18.87 0.63

2009-10 17.78 0.60

2010-11 19.41 0.57

2011-12 19.46 0.80

TABLE 5.13.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR HDFC BANK LTD


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .243a .059 -.255 .78317


The above table indicates that the value of R for HDFC BANK LTD is 24.3%

that refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

leverage and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for HDFC BANK LTD is -0.255. It indicates that there is no


112

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression .115 1 .115 .188 .694b

Residual 1.840 3 .613

Total 1.955 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the HDFC BANK LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 18.917 .442 42.807 .000 17.510 20.323

LV -.063 .146 -.243 -.434 .694 -.527 .401





= 18.917 - (0.063*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to 0.063. This

means that for every additional increase in leverage, dividend payout decreases by

0.063.

113

5.2.14 SBI

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 20.18 1.382608 27.35097 1.054923 20.36161

2008-09 20.19 1.318678 33.66559 0.926917 20.84287

2009-10 20.78 1.689259 9.226363 1.561995 23.98887

2010-11 23.05 1.628687 16.16857 1.839919 40.97727

2011-12 20.06 1.924761 9.134568 1.512859 41.46133

(Table no: 5.14 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of SBI)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 .107 -.235 .739 .516

Sig. (2-tailed)

.864 .704 .153 .373

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation .107 1 -.935

* .730 .772


.020 .162 .126

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.235 -.935

* 1 -.824 -.632

Sig. (2-tailed) .704 .020

.086 .253

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .739 .730 -.824 1 .783

Sig. (2-tailed) .153 .162 .086

.118

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .516 .772 -.632 .783 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .373 .126 .253 .118

N 5 5 5 5 5


114


Dividend payout ratio shows partial correlation with leverage and provision

for taxation. Dividend payout ratio shows weak correlation with Liquidity. Liquidity,

Leverage and provision for taxation are partially correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with growth. Growth, Liquidity,

Leverage and provision for taxation are negatively correlated.


indicates low correlation between dividend payout and growth. Simple regression

method is used in order to know the Influence of Growth on dividend payout which



2007-08 20.18 27.35

2008-09 20.19 33.67

2009-10 20.78 9.22

2010-11 23.05 16.17

2011-12 20.06 9.13

TABLE 5.14.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR SBI


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .235a .055 -.260 1.41469

a. Predictors: (Constant), SG

The above table indicates that the value of R for SBI is 23.5% that refers there

is a Weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as growth and the

dependent variable i.e. Dividend payout of the company. Value of adjusted R- Square

for SBI is -0.260. It indicates that there is no change in dividend payout due to the

changes in Size and Growth.

115

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression .349 1 .349 .175 .704b

Residual 6.004 3 2.001

Total 6.353 4


b. Predictors: (Constant), SG




no significant impact of growth on the dividend payout of the SBI.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 21.365 1.380 15.478 .001 16.972 25.757

GR -.027 .064 -.235 -.418 .704 -.231 .177





= 21.365 - (0.027*growth)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to 0.027. This

means that for every additional increase in growth, dividend payout decreases by

0.027.

116

5.2.15 AXIS BANK

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 23.49 0.368473 49.57959 0.641391 51.88372

2008-09 23.16 0.81182 34.81014 1.519532 51.26393

2009-10 22.57 0.636796 22.28902 1.070124 60.80845

2010-11 19.78 0.564283 34.35719 8.221409 35.3465

2011-12 18.15 0.750055 17.68111 1.493812 42.91099

(Table no: 5.15 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of AXIS

BANK)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.309 .625 -.447 .725

Sig. (2-tailed)

.614 .260 .450 .166

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.309 1 -.698 -.090 -.016


.190 .886 .980

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .625 -.698 1 .041 -.007

Sig. (2-tailed) .260 .190

.948 .991

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation -.447 -.090 .041 1 -.784

Sig. (2-tailed) .450 .886 .948

.116

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .725 -.016 -.007 -.784 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .166 .980 .991 .116

N 5 5 5 5 5

117


Dividend payout shows partial correlation with growth and provision for

taxation. Growth shows weak correlation with leverage.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity and leverage.

Liquidity, Growth, leverage and provision for taxation are negatively correlated.






2007-08 23.49 0.64

2008-09 23.16 1.52

2009-10 22.57 1.07

2010-11 19.78 8.22

2011-12 18.15 1.49

TABLE 5.15.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR AXIS BANK


Model Summary

Model R R

Square

Adjusted

R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .447a .200 -.067 2.42325

Predictors: (Constant), LV

The above table indicates that the value of R for AXIS BANK is 44.7% that



adjusted R- Square for AXIS BANK is -0.067. It indicates that there is no change in

dividend payout due to the changes in leverage.

118

ANOVAa

Model Sum of


1

Regression 4.401 1 4.401 .749 .450b

Residual 17.616 3 5.872

Total 22.017 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the AXIS BANK.

Coefficienta

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 22.287 1.468

15.184 .001 17.616 26.958

LV -.331 .382 -.447 -.866 .450 -1.548 .886




= 22.287 - (0.331*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to -0.331. This


0.331.

119

5.2.16 EICHER MOTORS LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 36.03 4.817247 3.184874 0.01674 -11.5561

2008-09 49.84 1.382425 -15.2089 0.031921 19.57967

2009-10 39.28 0.606257 14.38554 0.038255 12.89689

2010-11 34.68 1.646637 64.23788 0.028368 12.1836

2011-12 37.30 3.293939 30.91337 0.029807 16.70886


EICHER MOTRS LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.411 -.742 .379 .492

Sig. (2-tailed)

.492 .151 .529 .400

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.411 1 -.090 -.905* -.748


.885 .034 .146

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.742 -.090 1 .034 .120

Sig. (2-tailed) .151 .885

.957 .848

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .379 -.905* .034 1 .832

Sig. (2-tailed) .529 .034 .957

.081

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .492 -.748 .120 .832 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .400 .146 .848 .081

N 5 5 5 5 5


120


Dividend payout shows weak correlation with leverage and provision for

taxation. Growth, Leverage and Provision for taxation are nearer to strong positively

correlated.



Liquidity, Growth, Leverage and Provision for taxation are negatively correlated.






2007-08 36.03 3.18

2008-09 49.84 -15.21

2009-10 39.28 14.39

2010-11 34.68 64.24

2011-12 37.30 30.91

TABLE 5.16.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR EICHER MOTORS LTD.


Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .742a .550 .400 4.69493


The above table indicates that the value of R for EICHERMOTORS LTD. is

74.2% that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables

such as growth and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value

of adjusted R- Square for EICHERMOTORS LTD. is 0.400. It indicates that there is

40% change in dividend payout due to the changes in growth.

121

ANOVA

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 80.923 1 80.923 3.671 .151b

Residual 66.127 3 22.042

Total 147.050 4


Predictors: (Constant), SG




no significant impact of growth on the dividend payout of the EICHERMOTORS

LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for

B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 42.338 2.592

16.334 .000 34.089 50.587

SG -.149 .078 -.742 -1.916 .151 -.397 .099





= 42.338 - (0.149*growth)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to -0.149. This


0.149.

122

5.2.17 TVS LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 104.48 1.366843 2.559301 0.810219 9.228571

2008-09 106.06 1.451299 9.068777 1.123457 0.064309

2009-10 64.52 1.314714 8.984375 1.158199 -15.7895

2010-11 26.83 0.958798 46.33897 0.693 21.37097

2011-12 24.81 0.801487 9.902029 0.534188 21.20253

(Table no: 5.17 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of TVS

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 .938

* -.618 .653 -.525

Sig. (2-tailed)

.018 .267 .232 .364

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation .938

* 1 -.491 .857 -.740


.401 .064 .153

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.618 -.491 1 -.331 .480

Sig. (2-tailed) .267 .401

.586 .413

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .653 .857 -.331 1 -.927

*

Sig. (2-tailed) .232 .064 .586

.023

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation -.525 -.740 .480 -.927

* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .364 .153 .413 .023

N 5 5 5 5 5


123


Dividend payout ratio shows significant and strong positive correlation with

liquidity. It also shows partial correlation with leverage. Liquidity and leverages are

nearer to strong positively correlated. Growth and provision for taxation are weakly

correlated.


Dividend payout ratio shows negative correlation with growth and provision

for taxation. Liquidity, Growth and Provision for taxation are negatively correlated.

Growth and leverages are also negatively correlated. Leverages and provision for

taxation are also negatively correlated.






2007-08 104.48 2.56

2008-09 106.06 9.07

2009-10 64.52 8.98

2010-11 26.83 46.34

2011-12 24.81 9.90s

TABLE 5.17.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR TVS MOTORS LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .618a .381 .175 36.09108


The above table indicates that the value of R for TVS LTD. is 61.8% that refers

there is a partial linear correlation between explanatory variables such as growth and

the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of adjusted R-

Square for TVS LTD. is 0.175. It indicates that there are 17.5%changes in dividend

payout due to the changes in growth.

124

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 2408.733 1 2408.733 1.849 .267b

Residual 3907.699 3 1302.566

Total 6316.431 4






no significant impact of Growth on the dividend payout of the TVS LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 86.819 22.583

3.844 .031 14.950 158.687

SG -1.397 1.028 -.618 -1.360 .267 -4.668 1.873





= 86.819 - (1.397*growth)


with an independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant.

In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to -1.397. This


1.397.

125

5.2.18 HEROMOTOCORP LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 39.18 0.513377 17.50645 0.207619 31.36966

2008-09 31.15 0.493706 24.11607 0.180754 28.05003

2009-10 98.39 0.596771 -8.43981 0.282833 21.18644

2010-11 108.81 0.244915 27.30228 0.827825 19.83368

2011-12 37.78 1.112877 110.4026 0.96857 16.98531


HEROMOTOCORP LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.501 -.452 .226 -.467

Sig. (2-tailed)

.390 .445 .714 .428

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.501 1 .771 .384 -.418


.127 .524 .484

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.452 .771 1 .756 -.511

Sig. (2-tailed) .445 .127

.140 .379

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .226 .384 .756 1 -.835

Sig. (2-tailed) .714 .524 .140

.078

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation -.467 -.418 -.511 -.835 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .428 .484 .379 .078

N 5 5 5 5 5

126


Dividend payout ratio shows weak correlation with leverages. Liquidity and

growth are partially correlated whereas liquidity and leverages are weakly correlated.

Growth and leverages are partially correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity, Growth and

Provision for taxation. Provision for taxation, Leverages and Liquidity are negatively

correlated.


indicates low correlation between dividend payout and Liquidity. Simple regression




2007-08 39.18 0.51

2008-09 31.15 0.49

2009-10 98.39 0.60

2010-11 108.81 0.24

2011-12 37.78 1.11

TABLE 5.18.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR HERO MOTOCORP

LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .501a .251 .001 37.29073


The above table indicates that the value of R for HEROMOTOCORP LTD is

50.1% that refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables

such as liquidity and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company.

Value of adjusted R- Square for HEROMOTOCORP LTD. is 0.001. It indicates that

there is 0.1% change in dividend payout due to the changes in liquidity.

127

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 1397.057 1 1397.057 1.005 .390

b

Residual 4171.796 3 1390.599

Total 5568.852 4


Predictors: (Constant), LQ



unfit for the data).It indicates that null hypothesis is accepted. It means that there is no

significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the HEROMOTOCORP

LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 97.738 38.405

2.545 .084 -24.485 219.961

LQ -58.542 58.406 -.501 -1.002 .390 -244.416 127.333

a. Dependent Variable: DP




= 97.738 - (58.542*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to -58.542.

This means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout decreases

by 58.542.

128

5.2.19 JSW STEEL LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 16.83 0.752347 55.65064 0.982973 30.43049

2008-09 10.40 0.612877 25.35516 1.416293 32.33771

2009-10 10.16 0.729415 12.60517 1.19356 28.26273

2010-11 14.98 0.704793 78.69661 0.698175 27.63548

2011-12 12.01 0.26656 21.73504 0.792313 22.37701

(Table no: 5.19 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of JSW

STEEL LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY


Sig. (2-tailed)

.612 .078 .280 .935

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .309 1 .401 .273 .757


.503 .657 .138

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .836 .401 1 -.602 .138

Sig. (2-tailed) .078 .503

.282 .825

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.605 .273 -.602 1 .699

Sig. (2-tailed) .280 .657 .282

.189

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .051 .757 .138 .699 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .935 .138 .825 .189

N 5 5 5 5 5

129


Dividend payout ratio shows nearer to strong positive relationship with

growth. It shows weak correlation with liquidity and provision for taxation. Liquidity,

Growth and Leverage are weakly correlated. Liquidity and Provision for taxation are

partially correlated. Growth and Provision for taxation are weakly correlated.

Leverage and Provision for taxation are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with leverage. Growth and

Leverage are negatively correlated.






2007-08 16.83 0.98

2008-09 10.40 1.42

2009-10 10.16 1.19

2010-11 14.98 0.70

2011-12 12.01 0.79

TABLE 5.19.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR JSW STEEL LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .605a .366 .155 2.69260


The above table indicates that the value of R for JSW STEEL LTD is 60.5% that



adjusted R- Square for JSW STEEL LTD. is 0.155. It indicates that there is15.5%


130

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 12.568 1 12.568 1.733 .280b

Residual 21.750 3 7.250

Total 34.318 4






no significant impact of leverage on the dividend payout of the JSW STEEL LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 19.022 4.821

3.946 .029 3.680 34.364

LV -6.045 4.592 -.605 -1.317 .280 -20.658 8.567





= 19.022 - (6.045*leverage)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for leverage is equal to -6.045. This


6.045.

131

5.2.20 TATA STEEL LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 25.41 5.460724 84.76078 0.660118 33.67123

2008-09 24.57 0.555804 24.97229 0.89296 28.89533

2009-10 14.97 0.550925 9.543087 0.682846 30.04449

2010-11 16.9 1.383107 39.41748 0.59896 29.77605

2011-12 18.01 0.761049 7.413973 0.46352 32.06673

(Table no: 5.20 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of TATA

STEEL LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .598 .658 .521 .309

Sig. (2-tailed)

.287 .227 .369 .613

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .598 1 .950* -.067 .793


.013 .914 .109

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .658 .950* 1 .114 .582

Sig. (2-tailed) .227 .013

.856 .304

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation .521 -.067 .114 1 -.535

Sig. (2-tailed) .369 .914 .856

.353

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation .309 .793 .582 -.535 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .613 .109 .304 .353

N 5 5 5 5 5


132


Dividend payout ratio shows partial correlation with liquidity, Growth and

Leverage. It shows weak correlation with provision for taxation .Liquidity and

growths are significant and strong positively correlated. Liquidity and provision for

taxation are nearer to strong positively correlated. Growth and provision for taxation

are partially correlated. Growth and leverage are weakly correlated.


Liquidity and leverage are negatively correlated. Leverage and provision for

taxation are also negatively correlated. Considering above correlation matrix least

correlated value is 0.309 that indicates low correlation between dividend payout and

provision for taxation. Simple regression method is used in order to know the

Influence of Provision for Taxation on dividend payout which can be extracted from

below table.

YEAR DIVIDEND PAYOUT PROVISIONFOR TAXATION

2007-08 25.41 33.67

2008-09 24.57 28.90

2009-10 14.97 30.04

2010-11 16.9 29.78

2011-12 18.01 32.07

TABLE 5.20.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR TATA STEEL LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .309a .095 -.206 5.18154


The above table indicates that the value of R for TATA STEEL LTD is 30.9%

that refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as


Value of adjusted R- Square for TATA STEEL LTD. is -0.206. It indicates that there

is no change in dividend payout due to the changes in provision for taxation.

133

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 8.475 1 8.475 .316 .613b

Residual 80.545 3 26.848

Total 89.020 4


Predictors: (Constant), PT




no significant impact of provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the TATA

STEEL LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) -3.205 41.318

-.078 .943 -134.698 128.287

PT .750 1.335 .309 .562 .613 -3.500 5.000




= -3.205 + (0.750*provision for taxation)


with an independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant.


equal to 0.750. This means that for every additional increase in provision for taxation,

dividend payout increases by 0.750.

134

5.2.21 BHUSHAN STEEL

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DE

BT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 2.5 1.913829 64.62518 3.518169 21.37599

2008-09 2.5 1.964792 42.53221 3.965319 24.87243

2009-10 1.28 2.351108 46.32001 2.856976 26.53966

2010-11 1.42 0.618341 60.60054 2.088631 26.93708

2011-12 1.04 0.723636 32.45278 2.443565 25.03314


BHUSHAN STEEL)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 .499 .433 .873 -.684

Sig. (2-tailed)

.393 .466 .054 .203

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation .499 1 .090 .734 -.286


.885 .158 .641

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .433 .090 1 .022 -.326

Sig. (2-tailed) .466 .885

.971 .592

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .873 .734 .022 1 -.595

Sig. (2-tailed) .054 .158 .971

.290

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation -.684 -.286 -.326 -.595 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .203 .641 .592 .290

N 5 5 5 5 5

135


Dividend payout ratio shows nearer to strong positive correlation with

leverage. It shows weak correlation with liquidity and growth. Liquidity and growth

are weakly correlated. Liquidity and leverage are partially correlated. Growth and

leverage are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout is negatively correlated with provision for taxation. Provision

for taxation is negatively correlated with liquidity, growth and leverage.






2007-08 2.5 21.37599

2008-09 2.5 24.87243

2009-10 1.28 26.53966

2010-11 1.42 26.93708

2011-12 1.04 25.03314

TABLE 5.21.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR BHUSHAN STEEL


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .684a .468 .290 .58959


The above table indicates that the value of R for BHUSHAN STEEL 68.4% that



Value of adjusted R- Square for BHUSHAN STEEL is 0.290. It indicates that there is

29% change in dividend payout due to the changes in provision for taxation.

136

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression .916 1 .916 2.635 .203b

Residual 1.043 3 .348

Total 1.959 4






no significant impact of Provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the

BHUSHAN STEEL.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 7.189 3.362

2.138 .122 -3.511 17.890

PT -.218 .134 -.684 -1.623 .203 -.646 .209








In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for provision for taxation is equal

to -0.218. This means that for every additional increase in provision for taxation,


137

5.2.22 ACC LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 31 0.997811 19.4843 0.097811 30.16695

2008-09 27 0.72447 20.64045 0.094246 29.94769

2009-10 51 0.734917 6.102135 0.08099 23.34018

2010-11 71 0.987445 11.7743 0.071052 13.96104

2011-12 53 0.801967 45.07031 0.022078 26.87802

(Table no: 5.22 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of ACC

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .280 -.099 -.522 -.922*

Sig. (2-tailed)

.648 .874 .367 .026

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .280 1 -.111 .138 -.355


.859 .825 .558

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation -.099 -.111 1 -.754 .406

Sig. (2-tailed) .874 .859

.141 .498

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.522 .138 -.754 1 .179

Sig. (2-tailed) .367 .825 .141

.774

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation -.922* -.355 .406 .179 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .026 .558 .498 .774

N 5 5 5 5 5


138


Dividend payout ratio shows weak correlation with liquidity. Liquidity and

leverage are weakly correlated. Growth and provision for taxation are weakly

correlated. Leverage and provision for taxation are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout ratio shows negative correlation with growth, leverage and

provision for taxation. Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth and provision

for taxation. Growth is also negatively correlated with leverage.






2007-08 31 30.16695

2008-09 27 29.94769

2009-10 51 23.34018

2010-11 71 13.96104

2011-12 53 26.87802

TABLE 5.22.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR ACC LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .922a .850 .800 8.00112


The above table indicates that the value of R for ACC LTD. 92.2% that refers

there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as provision

for taxation and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for ACC is 0.800. It indicates that there is 80% change in dividend

payout due to the changes in provision for taxation.

139

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 1091.146 1 1091.146 17.044 .026

b

Residual 192.054 3 64.018

Total 1283.200 4






significant impact of Provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the ACC LTD.

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 107.938 15.282

7.063 .006 59.304 156.573

PT -2.467 .598 -.922 -4.128 .026 -4.370 -.565








In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for provision for taxation is equal

to -2.467. This means that for every additional increase in provision for taxation,


140

5.2.23 AMBUJA CEMENT LTD

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 28 1.586839 18.94109 0.050947 28.83249

2008-09 35 1.13684 11.59875 0.025608 32.43664

2009-10 37 1.309563 11.32022 0.008873 23.96457

2010-11 46 1.420928 10.55261 0.006141 27.83324

2011-12 50 1.819938 40.52177 0.003975 31.80862


AMBUJA CEMENT LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 .421 .499 -.881

* .174

Sig. (2-tailed)

.480 .393 .048 .779

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation .421 1 .871 -.071 .191


.054 .910 .758

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .499 .871 1 -.187 .482

Sig. (2-tailed) .393 .054

.764 .412

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation -.881

* -.071 -.187 1 .153

Sig. (2-tailed) .048 .910 .764

.806

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .174 .191 .482 .153 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .779 .758 .412 .806

N 5 5 5 5 5


141


Dividend payout shows weak correlation with liquidity, growth and provision

for taxation. Liquidity and growth are nearer to strong positively correlated. Liquidity

and provision for taxation are weakly correlated. Growth and provision for taxation

are partially correlated. Leverage and provision for taxation are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout ratio shows negative correlation with leverage. Liquidity and

leverage are negatively correlated. Growth and leverage are also negatively

correlated.






2007-08 28 0.050947

2008-09 35 0.025608

2009-10 37 0.008873

2010-11 46 0.006141

2011-12 50 0.003975

TABLE 5.23.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR AMBUJA CEMENT

LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .881a .776 .701 4.81665


The above table indicates that the value of R for AMBUJA CEMEN

LTD.T88.1% that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory

variables such as leverage and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the

company. Value of adjusted R- Square for AMBUJA CEMENT LTD. is 0.701. It

indicates that there is 70.1% change in dividend payout due to the changes in

leverage.

142

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 241.200 1 241.200 10.396 .048b

Residual 69.600 3 23.200

Total 310.800 4




predict the dependent variable, F (1,3) = 10.396, p <0.05 (i.e., the regression model is


significant impact of Leverage on the dividend payout of the AMBUJA CEMENT

LTD.

5.2.24 J.K.CEMENT LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 15.43 2.30891 13.64373 0.484674 23.48826

2008-09 20.17 2.893124 14.61467 0.475864 39.15899

2009-10 18.56 1.91447 41.21777 0.793145 27.39201

2010-11 21.8 1.408338 30.34089 0.957812 23.46174

2011-12 19.71 1.470444 5.222222 0.859167 37.94866


J.K.CEMENT LTD.)



143

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.349 .180 .614 .303

Sig. (2-tailed)

.565 .771 .271 .620

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.349 1 -.192 -.933

* .317


.757 .020 .604

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation .180 -.192 1 .374 -.558

Sig. (2-tailed) .771 .757

.536 .328

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .614 -.933

* .374 1 -.195

Sig. (2-tailed) .271 .020 .536

.753

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .303 .317 -.558 -.195 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .620 .604 .328 .753

N 5 5 5 5 5



Dividend payout shows partial correlation with leverage. Liquidity and

provision for taxation are weakly correlated. Growth and leverage are also weakly

correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity. Growth is

negatively correlated with liquidity and provision for taxation. Leverage is negatively

correlated with liquidity and provision for taxation.





144


2007-08 15.43 2.30891

2008-09 20.17 2.893124

2009-10 18.56 1.91447

2010-11 21.8 1.408338

2011-12 19.71 1.470444

TABLE 5.24.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR J.K.CEMENT LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .349a .122 -.171 2.56974


The above table indicates that the value of R for J.K.CEMENTLTD.34.9%

that refers there is a partial linear correlation between explanatory variables such as

liquidity and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of

adjusted R- Square for J.K.CEMENT LTD. is -0.171. It indicates that there is no


ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 2.751 1 2.751 .417 .565b

Residual 19.811 3 6.604

Total 22.562 4




predict the dependent variable, F (1,3) = 0.417, p >0.05 (i.e., the regression model is


no significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the J.K.CEMENT LTD.

145

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 21.814 4.308

5.064 .015 8.104 35.524

LQ -1.341 2.077 -.349 -.645 .565 -7.950 5.269





= 21.814 - (1.341*liquidity)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for liquidity is equal to -1.341. This

means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout decreases by

1.341.

5.2.25 IDFC

YEAR

DIVIDEN

D

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 20.24 3.213907 56.11324 4.086348 15.01101

2008-09 20.76 2.101689 6.76151 3.912584 22.27323

2009-10 18.47 3.010666 12.58417 3.887357 23.10313

2010-11 22.96 0.895019 46.9382 2.433129 26.18497

2011-12 22.55 0.744614 23.89485 2.478672 27.16947

(Table no: 5.25 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of IDFC)



146

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY


Sig. (2-tailed)

.033 .574 .061 .352

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation -.908* 1 .007 .944

* -.836


.992 .016 .077

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .342 .007 1 -.188 -.404

Sig. (2-tailed) .574 .992

.762 .500

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.861 .944* -.188 1 -.806

Sig. (2-tailed) .061 .016 .762

.100

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT


Sig. (2-tailed) .352 .077 .500 .100

N 5 5 5 5 5



Dividend payout shows partial correlation with provision for taxation and

weak correlation with growth. Liquidity and leverage is significant and positive

strongly correlated Liquidity and growth is weakly correlated.


Dividend payout is shows negative correlation with liquidity and leverage.

Provision for taxation is negatively correlated with liquidity, leverage and growth.

Growth and leverage are negatively correlated.






2007-08 20.24 3.213907

2008-09 20.76 2.101689

2009-10 18.47 3.010666

2010-11 22.96 0.895019

2011-12 22.55 0.744614

TABLE 5.25.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR IDFC

147


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .908a .824 .765 .88341


The above table indicates that the value of R for IDFC 90.8% that refers there

is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables such as liquidity and the

dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of adjusted R- Square

for IDFC is -0.765. It indicates that there is76.5% change in dividend payout due to

the changes in liquidity.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 10.939 1 10.939 14.017 .033b

Residual 2.341 3 .780

Total 13.280 4



The above table shows that the independent variables statistically

significantly predict the dependent variable, F (1, 3) = 14.017, p <0.05 (i.e., the

regression model is fit for the data). It indicates that null hypothesis is rejected. It

means that there is no significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the

IDFC.

148

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 23.859 .861

27.720 .000 21.120 26.598

LQ -1.436 .384 -.908 -3.744 .033 -2.657 -.215





= 23.859 - (1.436*liquidity)




1.436. This means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout

decreases by 1.436.

5.2.26 MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCAL LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 24.63 1.102762 11.61701 4.861293 34.91478

2008-09 24.84 4.363146 4.696244 4.552299 34.11952

2009-10 21.10 9.491111 22.50972 4.739193 33.84417

2010-11 22.46 1.643749 67.1444 2.801333 34.07212

2011-12 23.48 1.505872 35.65447 3.301144 32.97891

(Table no: 5.26 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of MAHINDRA

FINANCE LTD.)



149

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.630 -.502 .214 .347

Sig. (2-tailed)

.255 .389 .729 .567

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.630 1 -.293 .487 -.114


.633 .406 .855

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.502 -.293 1 -.903

* -.320

Sig. (2-tailed) .389 .633

.036 .599

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .214 .487 -.903

* 1 .528

Sig. (2-tailed) .729 .406 .036

.361

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .347 -.114 -.320 .528 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .567 .855 .599 .361

N 5 5 5 5 5



Dividend payout shows weak correlation with leverage and provision for

taxation. Liquidity and leverages are weakly correlated. Leverage and provision for

taxation are partially correlated.



Growth is negatively correlated with liquidity, leverage and provision for taxation.

Liquidity and provision for taxation are negatively correlated.





150


2007-08 24.63 1.102762

2008-09 24.84 4.363146

2009-10 21.10 9.491111

2010-11 22.46 1.643749

2011-12 23.48 1.505872

TABLE 5.26.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR MAHINDRA FINANCE

LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .630a .396 .195 1.39843


The above table indicates that the value of R for MAHINDRA FINANCE

LTD.63% that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory

variables such as liquidity and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the

company. Value of adjusted R- Square for MAHINDRA FINANCE LTD. is 0.195. It

indicates that there is 19.5% change in dividend payout due to the changes in

liquidity.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 3.852 1 3.852 1.970 .255

b

Residual 5.867 3 1.956

Total 9.718 4






no significant impact of Liquidity on the dividend payout of the MAHINDRA

FINANCE.

151

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 24.310 .952

25.529 .000 21.279 27.340

LQ -.278 .198 -.630 -1.403 .255 -.909 .353





= 24.310 - (0.278*liquidity)




0.278. This means that for every additional increase liquidity, dividend payout

decreases by 0.278.

5.2.27 J.M.FINANCIALLTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-

EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 1.10 3.601149 364.209 0.000142 22.35553

2008-09 188.23 13.60016 -0.39076 0.000143 39.42394

2009-10 39.62 3.776627 0.286936 0.000183 2.860692

2010-11 448.01 2.277279 0.967867 0.069132 -3.15232

2011-12 105.98 2.538482 1.04058 0.06833 6.830961


J.M.FINANCIAL LTD.)



152

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 -.011 -.488 .624 -.313

Sig. (2-tailed)

.986 .404 .261 .608

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation -.011 1 -.186 -.527 .870


.765 .361 .055

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.488 -.186 1 -.405 .279

Sig. (2-tailed) .404 .765

.498 .649

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .624 -.527 -.405 1 -.629

Sig. (2-tailed) .261 .361 .498

.256

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation -.313 .870 .279 -.629 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .608 .055 .649 .256

N 5 5 5 5 5


Dividend payout shows partial positive correlation with leverage. Liquidity

and provision for taxation are significant and strong positively correlated .Growth and

provisions for taxation are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity, growth and

provision for taxation. Liquidity is negatively correlated with growth and leverage.

Provision for taxation and leverage are negatively correlated.



method is used in order to know the Influence of Size and Growth on dividend payout

which can be extracted from below table.

153


2007-08 1.10 364.209

2008-09 188.23 -0.39076

2009-10 39.62 0.286936

2010-11 448.01 0.967867

2011-12 105.98 1.04058

TABLE 5.27.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR J.M.FINANCIAL LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .488a .238 -.016 179.11242


The above table indicates that the value of R for J.M.FINANCIAL

LTD.48.8% that refers there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory

variables such as growth and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the

company. Value of adjusted R- Square for J.M.FINANCIAL LTD. is -0.016. It

indicates that there is no change in dividend payout due to the changes in growth.

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 30103.427 1 30103.427 .938 .404

b

Residual 96243.772 3 32081.257

Total 126347.199 4






no significant impact of growth on the dividend payout of the J.M.FINANCIAL LTD.

154

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 195.638 89.674

2.182 .117 -89.743 481.020

SG -.533 .551 -.488 -.969 .404 -2.285 1.219





= 195.638 - (0.533*growth)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to -

0.533. This means that for every additional increase growth, dividend payout

decreases by 0.533.

155

5.2.28 DLF LTD. (Delhi Land & Finance)

YEAR

DIVIDEN

D

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 26.49 4.887092 164.4932 0.744192 17.4322

2008-09 21.90 6.049272 12.00751 0.776978 14.41321

2009-10 44.24 5.563922 15.78492 0.985023 18.63131

2010-11 27.24 2.160893 36.18166 0.924926 19.87191

2011-12 32.38 1.855611 3.748051 0.754715 30.42827

(Table no: 5.28 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of DLF

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson

Correlation 1 .034 -.281 .657 .286

Sig. (2-tailed)

.956 .647 .228 .641

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson

Correlation .034 1 .184 .047 -.798


.767 .940 .106

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson

Correlation -.281 .184 1 -.366 -.314

Sig. (2-tailed) .647 .767

.545 .607

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson

Correlation .657 .047 -.366 1 -.186

Sig. (2-tailed) .228 .940 .545

.765

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson

Correlation .286 -.798 -.314 -.186 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .641 .106 .607 .765

N 5 5 5 5 5

156


Dividend payout shows partial positive correlation with leverage. Dividend

payout shows weak positive correlation with liquidity and provision for taxation.

Liquidity is weakly correlated with growth and leverage.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with Growth. Provision for

taxation is negatively correlated with liquidity, leverage and growth. Growth and

leverage are negatively correlated.



method is used in order to know the Influence of Size and Growth on dividend payout

which can be extracted from below table.


2007-08 26.49 164.4932

2008-09 21.90 12.00751

2009-10 44.24 15.78492

2010-11 27.24 36.18166

2011-12 32.38 3.748051

TABLE 5.28.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR DLF LTD.


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .281a .079 -.228 9.48385


The above table indicates that the value of R for DLF LTD.28.1% that refers

there is a weak linear correlation between explanatory variables such as growth and

the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company. Value of adjusted R-

Square for DLF LTD. is -0.228. It indicates that there is no change in dividend payout

due to the changes in growth.

157

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 23.147 1 23.147 .257 .647

b

Residual 269.831 3 89.944

Total 292.977 4






no significant impact of Growth on the dividend payout of the DLF LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

95.0%

Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 32.116 5.364

5.987 .009 15.045 49.187

SG -.036 .071 -.281 -.507 .647 -.261 .189





= 32.116 - (0.036*growth)



In the above table, the unstandardized coefficient for growth is equal to -

0.036. This means that for every additional increase in growth, dividend payout

decreases by 0.036.

158

5.2.29 NBCC LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE(DE

BT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 62 1.17382 53.76009 #VALUE! 32.55296

2008-09 35 1.135781 36.36526 #VALUE! 33.67112

2009-10 26 1.106944 19.52333 #VALUE! 33.27526

2010-11 31 1.145616 498.7232 0.348166 33.05373

2011-12 35 1.227878 11.15493 0.268206 34.3863

(Table no: 5.29 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of NBCC

LTD.)



Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY

Pearson Correlation 1 .364 -.208 -.325 -.522

Sig. (2-tailed)

.547 .737 .594 .366

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation .364 1 -.165 .460 .477


.791 .435 .417

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG


Sig. (2-tailed) .737 .791

.191 .585

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.325 .460 .697 1 .321

Sig. (2-tailed) .594 .435 .191

.598

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT

Pearson Correlation -.522 .477 -.332 .321 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .366 .417 .585 .598

N 5 5 5 5 5

159


Dividend payout shows weak positive correlation with liquidity. Liquidity is

weakly correlated with leverage and provision for taxation. Growth and leverage are

partial positive correlated. Leverage and provision for taxation are weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with growth, leverage and

provision for taxation. Liquidity and growth are negatively correlated. Provision for

taxation and growth are also negatively correlated.






2007-08 62 32.55296

2008-09 35 33.67112

2009-10 26 33.27526

2010-11 31 33.05373

2011-12 35 34.3863

TABLE 5.29.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR NBCC LTD


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .522a .273 .031 13.80861


The above table indicates that the value of R for NBCC LTD. 52.2% that



Value of adjusted R- Square for NBCC LTD. is 0.031. It indicates that there is 3.1%

change in dividend payout due to the changes in provision for taxation.

160

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1

Regression 214.767 1 214.767 1.126 .366b

Residual 572.033 3 190.678

Total 786.800 4






no significant impact of provision for taxation on the dividend payout of the NBCC

LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardize

d

Coefficients T Sig.

95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error Beta

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1

(Constant) 392.9

13

334.66

2 1.174 .325

-

672.130

1457.95

6

PT

-

10.63

6

10.022 -.522 -

1.061 .366 -42.530 21.258









equal to -10.636. This means that for every additional increase in provision for

taxation, dividend payout decreases by 10.636.

161

5.2.30 JMC PROJECTS LTD.

YEAR DIVIDEND

PAYOUT

LIQUIDITY

(CURRENT

RATIO)

SIZE &

GROWTH

(TOTAL

ASSETS)

LEVERAGE

(DEBT-EQUITY

RATIO)

PROVISION

FOR

TAXATION

2007-08 15.81 1.301653 51.21288 0.650926 35.68286

2008-09 9.87 1.440051 37.78507 0.965078 29.23571

2009-10 10.97 1.443749 5.136792 0.677613 25.38691

2010-11 13.05 1.379837 195.8477 0.660327 23.17119

2011-12 10.06 1.404051 20.45268 0.95145 19.31125

(Table no: 5.30 Dividend payout ratio and all independent variables of JMC

PROJECTS LTD.)

In order to know the correlation of different variables with dividend payout above

table is used and on the basis of that, below correlation matrix is as follows:

Correlations

DPY LQ SG LV PT

DPY


Sig. (2-tailed)

.024 .530 .132 .231

N 5 5 5 5 5

LQ

Pearson Correlation -.925* 1 -.296 .500 -.555


.629 .391 .332

N 5 5 5 5 5

SG

Pearson Correlation .378 -.296 1 -.410 -.130

Sig. (2-tailed) .530 .629

.493 .835

N 5 5 5 5 5

LV

Pearson Correlation -.765 .500 -.410 1 -.346

Sig. (2-tailed) .132 .391 .493

.569

N 5 5 5 5 5

PT


Sig. (2-tailed) .231 .332 .835 .569

N 5 5 5 5 5


162


Dividend payout shows partial positive correlation with provision for taxation.

Dividend payout shows weak correlation with growth. Liquidity and leverage are

weakly correlated.


Dividend payout shows negative correlation with liquidity and leverage.

Provision for taxation is negatively correlated with liquidity, leverage and growth.

Growth is negatively correlated with liquidity and leverage.






2007-08 15.81 1.301653

2008-09 9.87 1.440051

2009-10 10.97 1.443749

2010-11 13.05 1.379837

2011-12 10.06 1.404051

TABLE 5.30.1: SIMPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR JMC PROJECTS LTD.


Model Summary


Estimate

1 .925a .856 .808 1.09585


The above table indicates that the value of R for JMC PROJECTS LTD.

92.5% that refers there is a positive linear correlation between explanatory variables

such as liquidity and the dependent variable i.e. dividend payout of the company.

Value of adjusted R- Square for JMC PROJECTS LTD. is 0.808. It indicates that

there is 80.8% change in dividend payout due to the changes in liquidity.

163

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 21.366 1 21.366 17.792 .024b

Residual 3.603 3 1.201

Total 24.968 4

Dependent Variable: DPY





significant impact of liquidity on the dividend payout of the JMC PROJECTS LTD.

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

T Sig. 95.0% Confidence

Interval for B

B Std.

Error

Beta Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 (Constant) 67.558 13.192 5.121 .014 25.575 109.541

LQ -39.893 9.458 -.925 -4.218 .024 -69.992 -9.794

a. Dependent Variable: DPY




= 67.558 - (39.893*liquidity)




39.893. This means that for every additional increase in liquidity, dividend payout

decreases by 39.893.

164

5.3 SUMMARY DETAILS:

SR

NO.

NAME OF

COMPANIES

LEAST

RELATED

VARIABLE

R-

VALUE

ADJUSTED

R-VALUE

P-

VALUE

NULL

HYPOTHESIS

ACCEPTED

OR

REJECTED

1 Dabur India Ltd. Size and

growth 0.282 -0.227 0.645 Accepted

2 Nestle India Ltd. Provision for

Taxation 0.885 0.71 0.046 Rejected

3 Britannia Industries

Limited Liquidity 0.713 0.344 0.177 Accepted

4 NTPC Limited Leverage 0.955 0.883 0.011 Rejected

5

Power Grid

Corporation of

India

Limited (POWER

GRID)

Leverage 0.814 0.550 0.094 Accepted

6 Tata Power Leverage 0.58 0.115 0.306 Accepted

7 Cipla Global

Limited

Provision for

Taxation 0.758 0.433 0.138 Accepted

8 Dr. Reddy's

Laboratories Ltd Liquidity 0.879 0.698 0.049 Rejected

9 Sun Pharmaceutical

Industries Limited Leverage 0.377 -0.144 0.532 Accepted

10 Infosys Liquidity 0.376 -0.145 0.533 Accepted

11 Tata Consultancy

ServicesLimited Liquidity 0.122 -0.314 0.845 Accepted

12 Wipro Limited Leverage 0.77 0.458 0.127 Accepted

13 HDFC Bank

Limited Leverage 0.243 -0.255 0.694 Accepted

14 State Bank of India Size and


165

SR

NO.

NAME OF

COMPANIES

LEAST

RELATED

VARIABLE

R-

VALUE

ADJUSTED

R-VALUE

P-

VALUE

NULL

HYPOTHESIS

ACCEPTED

OR

REJECTED

15 Axis Bank Leverage 0.447 -0.067 0.45 Accepted

16 Eicher Motors

Limited

Size and

growth 0.742 0.4 0.151 Accepted

17 TVS Motor

Company Limited

Size and

growth 0.618 0.175 0.267 Accepted

18 Hero Motocorp Ltd. Liquidity 0.501 0.001 0.39 Accepted

19 JSW Steel Ltd Leverage 0.605 0.155 0.28 Accepted

20 Tata Steel Limited Provision for

Taxation 0.309 -0.206 0.613 Accepted

21 Bhushan Steel Provision for


22 ACC Limited Provision for

Taxation 0.922 0.8 0.026 Rejected

23 Ambuja Cements

Limited Leverage 0.881 0.701 0.048 Rejected

24 J.K cement Limited Liquidity 0.349 -0.171 0.565 Accepted

25

Infrastructure

Development

Finance Company

Liquidity 0.908 0.765 0.033 Rejected

26

Mahindra &

Mahindra Financial

Services Limited

Liquidity 0.63 0.195 0.255 Accepted

27 JM Financial

Limited

Size and


28

DLF

Limited (Delhi Lan

d & Finance)

Size and


29

National Buildings

Construction

Corporation Limited

Provision for


30 JMC Projects

(India) Ltd. Liquidity 0.925 0.808 0.024 Rejected

166

REFERENCES

Partington, G. H. (1987). Variables influencing dividend policy in

Australia:Survey Results. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 16,

p.165-182.

1Megginson, W. (1997). In Corporate Finance Theory,Reading,Addison-

Wesley ( p.355).

Partington, G. H. (1987). Variables influencing dividend policy in

Australia:Survey Results. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 16,

p.165-182.

Gaver, J. a. (1993). Additional Evidence on the Association between

Investment Opportunity Set and Corporate Financing,Dividend and

Compensation plocies . Journal of Accounting and Economics, p.185-209

T.N.Pandey,Budget 1997:New Tax Concept Relating to Dividend Income,

Chartered Secretary, April 1997,p.365-366

Documents

5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DIVIDEND POLICY - …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/70593/16/16_chapter 5.pdf · dividend and firm size influence the dividend policy of a company.Megginson,195737