A SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF HDFC LOW-INCOME APPLICANTS

IN BOMBAY AND BANGALORE

February 1983

OFFICE OF HOUSING AND URBAN PROGRAMS

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Prepared by

6oc PADCO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

LO COLLABORATIVE INTERNATIONAL

A Socio-Economic Analysis of HCFC Lzw-.hcore Loan Acolicants in BOMAY and 3ANGALCRE.

PREPARED FOR

Housing Development Finance Corporation

( HDFC )

USAID PRE/HUD

USAID PRE/HUD RHUDO/Asia

ey

PAOCO INC.

7834, JEFFERSON PLACE N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.Z. 20036.

February, 1983.

?ntroduct ion.

This study was carried out to orovide socio-economic data on celcw­

.edian income ( Rs.Indian 1,200 ) HOF loan applicanus with particular empnasis

on extent and type of household savings end sources of funos for ncusing ( ocher

than HrOEL loans ). The groundwork for the stdICy was carried out in 2ombay ana

angalore from Cecemoer 3 - 7th, 1982. The data obtained nas teen processed

by hand and the results are attached in the form of 12 Tables and 4 Figures.

etnodolooy.

As it was not possible to draw a statistically random sample of individual low-income HDFC borrowers in the time available, 100 individual

cases were selected from the Agenda Item lists in Bangalore and 80 individual

zases were selected from the Agenda Item lists in Bomoay. Selection criteria

were that the borrowers should be at or below the median income of Rsl,200;

in addition, the Bangalore cases were split 50-50 between recent cases

( undisbursed loans ) and older cases ( fully disbursed loans ), while in

2ombay 50 recent cases were selected and 30 older cases, and the stage of :iscursal .n<eo -as:nrouohcu,. t orovec Za -iff... .....

ases :ea-Lw-reoi-an income in Sroay.

Owing to :he fact that this is noc a szatisticaly rancom sample,

ano that the Eomoay files were so mixec, otaa has not, on the wnole, oeen

-naly-deo according to the tine-lapse factor except in the case of Table 4.

Data was drawn frincialyfrom the ollowi,g for,-, in the H-ED

;moividual case files:

- Individual Residential Loan Application Form;

- HCFC Loan Appraisal Form ( Individual );

- HCFC Loan Application Follow-UL Letter;

- HCfC Request for Verification of Employment.

Princioal Findinos of the Analysis.

1. The gombay and Bangalore low-income applicants selected disQ!py some strikingly differant cnaracteristics: Bangalore eoolicants are more likely :0 be older( 37 years ) on average; marrieo ( 95% ), and uithi larger families ( 4.7 persons ).By contrast, '2% of the Bombay sample are single persons, ;v*-irail they have an average ae 29 years average familyzf and an size of 2.5 ar sons ( Tacle 1 ). 7n both Bombay and Bangalore, however, over G0%, of apoicanzs are male and sole borrowers. 2. As to be expected, both Bombay and Bangalore low-income aoplicants display a very different average loan profile ( with the sole exception of average age,in anoalore ) to the General Average Loan Profile Presenteo in the HCFC Report of Operaticns as at October 31st ( Table 2 ).

3. The difference in oncupational structure of Bombay and Bangalore applicants reflects certain features of the economic structure and history of the two cities. Bangalore has become heavily industrialized only over the last 10 ­12 years and is the location of such major industrial concerns as Hindu Aeronautics, Indian Telephones, Bharat Electronics etc. and there has been a pe rt-up demand for housing from workers in this sector. 59% of Bangaloreapplicants have directly industrial jobs ( e.g. machine operator, checker etc )while many of those in the clerical category work in this sector too.

Althougn Bombay theis most industrialized urtan &icaicn in Inoia, -omoay -opiicancs occuoations :flacz :o a oraoer ixzanz -- e ano aoministrat:ive szructures of -nat city, though :ne imoor:anr chemical ano

La rxmanufacturing inouszries are -ecresenreo :=o, mainiy 5t :ne s.cnnicai level. There is a noticeable orocortion of young professionals Just ceginnino their careers ( Figure 1 ).

The average length of present enrloyent is 5.5 years in Sombay, compared to 12 years in Bangalore.

4. Average monthly family incomes in 3omoay and 3argailore are Rs. 10O1 and959, respectively. I is :.usteri g Rs.

There heavy in-_s-.Ls.l200in theth Rs. 901 - 12C0 incomen in groups ( 80% in Bombay and 81% in Sangalore ). However, more apoplicants ( 26% earn between Rs 1100 - 120 per month in Bomoay than in Banoalore ( 2)

( Table 3 ).

5. Table 4 indicates that recent HCFC applicants in Bangalore have slightly

lower average incomes than was the case 6 months to I year ago, -while the

opposite is the case in 3omcay. However, not too .iuch significance should be

attached to this, for reasons mentioned in the Introduction.

S. Table 5 shows the higher cost of real estate in Bombay - al:Tost douole for persons in this income category, at least.that of Bangalore A !lany Bombay acpiicants intend to ourchase, or are purchasing

small flats or apart-ents constructed by rivate or oublic developers ( e.g.

CIOCO ), whereas in Bangalore, families are construciing fairly large, indiv­

idual bungalow-type homes.

7. Tables 6 and 7 show a Loan/Cost ratio of 39% in Bombay and 36% in Banga­

lore, compared to 43% overall ( as of Oct. 1982 ), indicating that lower­

income applicants have to provide more of tteir housing finance from within

their own resources. However, both Tables show an excess of total available

finance over unit cost. Advance payments made, HDFC loans and other finance

to be obtained are each roughly one third of total unit cost.

. hile it is :enerally indicated Zn -CFC f ales nezher cerscnal savirs ony

:r savings ous ocher sour ms of -nance nave teen ,Ci47 o n pay,-encs aiready

mace, -her is not often a treakoown of :-n .mcuiz Zoncibuceo from aecn sourcs.

Consecuently, it is not possible to obtain an accurate estimate of the zt-Cl amount of savings already scent. The other sources of finance utilized are

quite diverse and include chit funds*, Orovident Funds, loans and gifts from

relatives and friencs, sale of gold end jewellery, sale of prcoerty ( land, nouses, aoar tents ), encashment of Fixed, Recurring and Cum Jlative Tie deposits in

aanks, and agricultural income ( only 3 persons ). average

in both Bombay and BangaloreApaymTents already made cut of personal

savings only are, on the whole, approximately half -hat of lpayments mace from

; Chit funds are a variation of the common rotatino credit association: in -ni.scase, bids are made for the"Pot" and the excess -ver the loan is paid tack anc snarso cy te other Temcers - a form of interest.

i

several sources. However, 29% of the sample in Bombay hao as yet made no pay­

ments - most of these had not yet finally selected their twellin'g units. In

Bangalore, only 2% had made no payments and this was because they intended to

extend theL cwn houses. E410 of Bangalore apnicants had used savings alone

for payments, c=rrared with only -0% in Bombay. ( Tables 3 and 9 ).

9. HOFC files were, understandably, rore explicit about the sources of

"other finance" required to cover the gap between oownpayrrents plus the HOFC

loan, and the total cost of the unit. Tables 10 and 11 show the average

amuntyet to be contributed, with percent share of the total amount, from

each of 4 categories. Table 12 shows the actual number and percentage of the

sample in each city who had such other sources of funds at their disposal, and

Figures 2, 3 end 4 give a more detailed breakdown of the composition of each

category.

Totals in Tables 10 and 11 show that Bombay applicants propose to

obtain 36% of their remaining finance through further borrowings, as conpared

to only 20% for Bangalore. This is prcoably due largely to the ycunger age

and unmarried status of a large prcportion of the 3omoay samole. These young

ceacie - :alyng -eav yv :n :arena. 22: o-- :nero-- starec. - 3are: * t :..m Th

-emcoraohic :naraczeristics also -ouctzess account -r the astonisn-ig -iffrenca

the part playeo Pr:. Funds a°rvioenc as source of Finance (.n 3omoay

and 22% in Bangalore ). :n fact, some of the Bombay samle hac already used

their Provicent funds in making oownpayments; however, the more mature

average age and the greater average length of present sroiloyrrent of Bangaiore

applicants makes it more likely cnat they nave :eacneo cne scage unere :hey can

withdrew and utilize their Provident Fund savings ( incluoing :he snare con­

tributed by the erployer ) without having to repay it. Bombay applicants are

much less likely to have been at work long enough with the same employer to be

able to do this. in addition, several are self -enployeo.

u. in Tale 12, it is noticeable :net a greater orpcor:4in of 3-ancalcre

applicants throughout have access to the different sources of funds than

in Bombay.

1U. Fig. 2 demonstrates the relative imortance of the sale of gold and jewellery in Bancalore. The "Cther" category is cormosed mainly of refunds of deposits made to Lanclcrds ano has teen swelled, in romcay, by the Payrrent

of RsIO0,O00 "Pugree" :o one apolicant ( i.e. a landlord's incentive PayirLnt

to induce a tenant to rove out -. in Bombay tenants cannot te evicted after

12 years occupancy ).

12. Fig. 3 shows the importance of families in providing additional finance at low- or no- interest rates, while loans from chit funds often carry high rates of interest. While chit funds are usually treated as a form of contractual savings in india, they are here treated as borcrwings, as applicants are taking loans which they have to repay with interest. ( It must also be noted that HOFC encourages applicants to pay off other formal loan obligations before taking

an HOFC loan ).

U3. Fig. :cermcnszrares t:ne occularity of :ne recular Bank Savings Accounts.

S:orawais, :on1ienien situatac :ran c:es anoaLterest oci:L;iriat

-hat -OF. -i ., jery, ac-ijelv icencifnave anocersuaca octanriaL savers -o make aeoosics with HCF- if it ,isnes to change present savings patterns in its

own favour. Any campaign oy HCFC tj mobilize small savings should be very

carefully planned against a background of thorough field research, whicn

should also be carried out in other :entres ,here HCF- -as imoor ant ocerations,

or nas plans for expansion.

14. While it is not possible ( owing to the oroblem uith HOFC files noted in ( 8 ) above ) to accurately =alculate savings:incomns ratios or average

propensity to save, it is evicent that these are hi;h in both Borrbay and Bangalore. The propensity :o save through Provicenc Func Isiign also, tncugn

this is not reflected in the present Bombay data. In addition 52% of the Bombay sample and56% of the Bangalore samoie declareo that they hao Life insurance

Pol icies.

15. Finally, it must Ce noted that an important cnaraczaristic of the Bombay sample is that a large proportion of it is prooably upwardly mobile, owing to its present youth and relatiely hign level of education - this group will not stay belcw the median income for long, and tney will not necessarily wish to stay in the homes they are presently purchasing.

TABLE 1.

Basic Characteristics crrbay 3angalore

of Applicants

Average Age ( years ) 29

Male(%) 91 96

Female(%) 4

Married ( % )5 95

Single (50 5

Average Family :ize .5 4.7

No Coborrcwer ( A ) 91 92

Basic Characteristics of HCFC Loan Aolicants in crnav and8 noalce

___

tAELE 2.

fAll HDC Applicants Bonbay Loui- BaflgdloL- Low-,I October, 1982 Income ApplicanLs :irio,,. lIpp[ icants Dec. 1982 De,. 1982

:uslt of Unit J 97000 49000 52011

... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ._L jLdv tIJe"[li.lt . - - .

. . . .4200" .

19000 UIII

Ahea oF [jit L 74 sq. m. 31 sq. m. i 59 Sq. . I - -s

/Aje ir Appl icant 38 years 29 y~carz 3"/ years

FamiLy h'cuue fls. 2,300 Rs.1001 its. 959

Cuipaison uf l ,fIomy Lowai id Jaaijalore Incom Applicants with General Average Loan Piotf ile PIrsented hi III)F: Mtanageirent Report of Operations as at Oct. 31st. 1982.

FJLa rn.-- Uccupation of III--C Low-Incone Loan Aepplicants in Ooii._y .rid r3aIyalore.

-Iorj 00 Y .y

-

)

I- )

1-Li- *

F41-4

C

W)

lmm

0

u-S

('1

l

0Cw

U)0

UU)

.C

0C

.

InmIn

flU,)

In

i

-4 0 ,-IY

f4}

!l

n. I.t

o (U

00 o

o o

E-D

01 0

0 D (Af ( .1U)Irr .) n

1-4 .o

(

J)

DU

o

o

0

o-0

(CU

~0~ i0 0

.m

0 0 2

0 0

(4I

I1wlr-1 tw

0-

0

C ty

u3 n 1 - 4

U

11

11J

0

s

t-

.5,1"

In .-1

>­-(I.{

-

i

o0

0

O

o-o

o0

•7

'7%

A­

r,

. 0

0 0

oPl0

a

0

0

o

a

00a

5

150

0

0

0 o

0U

c .

Ito

,0

. .

.

-

U0lIO~

c

0 0 0

e-

0

ohi- o

Iey J Bamray

[jjIln(Ja[01e.

Incone 2ombay Bangalore

Group

(Rupees)

Aver=e AverageNumcer f Nurpter

1200 210121 26 1176 2 2 1210

901 - 1o0 43 54 1005 79 79 989

701 -900 11 14 842 l17 17 825

501 -700 5 6 583 2 2 627

, f TOTAhL 180 P 100 1001 100 100 959

Averaoe income oer month ( in Rucees ) Ny of PerscnsNumber in Samole -v income Grouo: 3ombay anc -anoalore Tctals.

Note: One person in the 3ancaiore 201 - 1200 incoe grcuo was founo :o nave

an extra source of income .hich brcuqnt his TconthiY total to Rs. 1270. Likewise, one erson in Bombay was stated to have a monthly income of

only Rs.417, but was incluced in the tottom income group. This accounts for the skewing inthe too and bottom income in these twogrcups cities.

TABLE 4.

Income G:Guo

Recent OLder

BOMBAY.ANGALORE

Recent Oler

1101 - 1200 1176 1176 1169 _?,0

901 -1100

701 -900

501 - 700

1012

86F

589

990

829

573

979

821

999

831

627

;TOTAL 1020 990 951 996

Average Incomes of -iOFC L:w-7ncoe 2enef iciarss Ln

Bangalore - Comparison of Recent and Olcer Cases.

Sorray and

_________

TABLE 5.

Average Property VailLe ( in RUoes ) Average Are- ( in sq. irm:esi cmGroup __________

Bombay Bangalore Bomay Bang alore

i1101 - 1200 55,095 1000 3

901 - 1100 44,130 52,826 28 58

701 - 900 47.,450 49,213 34 61

1501 70,0 33 ,Soo 57,7Eo 34 a6 - . I ­

7'T A L a5 O Z '7. .

Averace DisclosedValue of Procerties and Average Ara in 2uare Metres -

Bombav and Bangalore Totals, byI ncfme Group.

3omay values are 92 of Sangalore values, unile 3omay areas aze znly 52%f Bangalore areas. Bomoay averace value per sq. netre is Rs.1595. Bangalore average value per sq. metre is Rs.889.

Group

11.01 -12)0D

901 1100

701 - goo

501 - 700

Total

Boiiay rotal:

Average uIly

Incueie ( Us. )

Averai-j I11f-C I u.a Atverage amount

of Payments

Average amounl

of Other Funds

Tolal F inalce

,Available

Average cost

Uinit.

oF

Already made IAvailable .. .. . .____.

1176 21952 26515 28883 ,Ij

177351) 65095

1005 19iriu 14784 i 17801 51655 44130

842 17162 21072 3709 41963 47450

__________________________________. ....... . . . ..................... . . .. - ~ - . 583 11600 12000 11500 35100 33900

_ _I _

10111

.... 19100 18669 18379 J 56148 449450

.--. ________ I Suuivnary oF Finance for lotisiiij - Iital Finance Available for Housing by Incoie Croup and by Average Cost Per IJhit.

_ _ _ _

I ......... .. ..

[ncoaau Average Pkinthly Average II- ,mi Average Amount Average Aount Total F inance Average Cost of

( Rs ) of Paymfents of Other Funds A s ) U i (( Rs )Group Incume( = l ) ......... .. IAready M de Available (fls,) Avi1l Rs )]

L,1 - 1212 1210 215011 12000 29000 625]11 6LIIIJu

901 - 110 989 lY.ui 15952 18432 53764 52 12

701 -90 [ 825 . 19055 15756 51752,,

I 0I

501 - 710 527 12 litI 27500 20500 609If1 57750

TOTAL 959 18810 16646 18230 1 53746 52473

Bangalore Total: Suounory of Finance for I.aijt - Fotal Finance Available for Housing by Incom Grmup and by Average Cost

per Unit ( in Hupees )

rIALLE 8.

Incore. 5ot J'CU l Pjynents Made Group o....r.. ........

Sav iiqs only iSavings and Ofer Source No Pay meLsfri.. ,-. .............I j I .... Awil. ( s R) ~ No .n..uL(FIs)No.

.erson 1Persol is risos

1101 1.200 21431 5 291157 [0 48 6 28 26515 21 Io(

1100 21902 11 26 14 32 [4784 43 100 : 'I "

I I i -70L- 900 .13L[t 5 i' 31(01] 4 36 2 18 21(.72 I 100

501 - 700 85011 2 4', 155011 2 I ... . ....... - -.

'.' 40 1 201 [21100 5 100

I II . . . . . I.i

TOTAL 1257 I 3t 3 25426 27 ' 34 J 23 291

Ave'ake Ani..it i" PaywieiiLs ALreatly M -bybLuLIncome group and Source of Payient: Bobntay loat.

--

5tircu "f I'..yiii.mits Made

Group Savings Only Sav ings and Other Source No Paynents

,,wuiL (Rs) N . Ai,,,unL (Rs) 0o % No. ,\,,i,nL(Is)" --e-s s Persons Is %eLso- .ersons

1101- 1200 600 ) 18000 1 so 1201101[ ' 1 9 273

4 3 5 1 20 48 34 4 3 2 _ _-......2O 8I90 - 1 1 01 3 ........1 .....-.. . . ... __ ...

...--............

I I _

701 901] 8959 - - - - -- --......... _______.....__,__... ....--- -..... --. . .I9 --.-. 5 30413 8 j7 19 5 17 1.1, n19t155

...

[ 7 ] .

501 -700 .200111 I 5 43000 50J -- -- 2702 100 0I '1 - ... -..... I

I' - ! - .

TOTAL 11.447 54 " 54 23026 44 44 1 2 2216646 l 100SI ...... .. .............. ....... 1 ........... G : Bangalore Total .

Banga ore T oka . ti/ [i c e roup and Source O Pay nentll:

Lof I byents AIz'u:ady l~s 6.ue£.ie Amui

icome Group Disposal of Asse Ls/ [nue -iL ui[ ,,-lvi e lI

FSocrowifis u dS a i g o r sr

foLal l a

H.ot - 12011 18095 63% 5835 20% 4952 17% 28883 100

got 1100 2995 27%29 2% 6278 35% 8249 1781)L -6%10]

501 700

tOTAL

Note: ~ ~ ~

70(1

54166

~prtei

,

I

i

~ ~q~yi:i

5%

I

35%

~

.4i11

.

1LJ2

" I I

~ - -vraj .---.--.. --is55yas

2% 12480

. . .I .. .I .. ... .

1% 5192.j61133

Ii .­

22%

't

I

8120

LJ

s

I _

i71%

I5.92

I

I

I - n

111(

. ? 87 0

-

FmOLIE

Note;

10 :Ot~lurz Sna-[ces of Fnrds I" l II-,,uhraaib.y Incomle roup ( Rverage Arnunt inlRupees and %.uf"[otlshareSUlrnt0 Ie Paid') -io~iibayTotzal..­

fluera.e [uLIUylI of pi-eseiat eeajiluyii-:at is 5.5 years.

Incoiii Group ris tleiaio"lLs/ iijv it-6 t Fund OroupIncuwi Disposal of AiiAti/I--____­

1101 - 1200 9500 33% 29%

901 -1100 5850 32% 3

701 - 90 29L2 18% 258I 16%

501 ­ 700 UOOU44% 2 l110l1 10% 501 700 UI44 288 0%-

- -. ... .9500 ....

Total 5486 3M1% 411/4 22%

T USt.E - ICts of11 :tthe c)tI piF oe by T ncome ___Si ii to "1 PR aiiqaloreTotal.i i-

Note: Average Leuqjth of present eL.lJIuJy0ajlul.is 12 years.

av irxjs B~orrowings I I

rtota

3000 10% 8001) 28% 129001 I on

48483%3 [26% 0 I23%140 , 18%.1 43I0 I

6365

I

40% 3891 25%

i

.575600

--

I 93 0;

46 % 46 %

"-"---....... ......

2 5 1 [ 0

40I

4972 27% 3697 20%

±,I:L­

18230 100

Group( verage n motnntin R inl-jes 'igi%/ f Ttal

r[BLE 12.

F- - - F -.. ... i-

SIurce of FIunds lJI II illy BANGALORE TOTAL

Nurrter I"

Disposal of

II ives LUEnts/AssuI.s 19

_ _

- .-. -" I. - I

Pro idenL F

14

Sa .ings 480

II Uorwig

Borrigs 3U. I-

j

'

"-

24

2

.-U 60

49 * --

'

--- -

54

55

8

46 *-- --

.I.

. i

I

I I

-I-;

54

.... .

55

80

46

.

I

. .

,I

.

73

57

L28

L i

I 41)

-... ...

31.

71.

47

NuimtJr and Il'cunLk.ju tl S.iple Ilaving Other Sources of Funds

tIaality lud Banglore Totals.

at hIeir Disposal:

FIGURE 2.

Bangalore

.. \

Land and Prcperty

1%,

Other

Other

47%

8omcay

"

Gold and Jewellery

76% Land and Property

21%

o . . aweer

Other Sources of Funds for Hcusing in tomcay and 3angalore: Percent Cormosition of Assecsinesm,ntz.

Note: The category "Other" is mainly comoosed of refunds of depositsmade to Landlords.

FIGURE 3.

" %".,/Chit Funds Other C t Funds 3020% \' 15%

II,,F:-iencs,

7: r A

Family 80% Family 70%

EANGALORE .0M8..Y

Other Sources of Funds for Housing in 2ombay and -angalcre - ercent

Compositicn of "Borrowings"

FIGURE 4.

Other Type f Savings Acccun "­

4 f .Cther T~ /of S/Acc/

,, / / /

( Ordinary Savings Account

94% Ordinary Savings Accpunt

80%01

..- ,

80MBAY 3ANGALORE

Other Sources of Funds for Housing in ,ontay -nO -angalors - Percent

Composition of "Savings"

,YEDIAN INCOMES DATA UPDATE.

A review of reoorts availaole from Govarnment and ncn-Covernrmnt organizations in 8omoaay and inquirL's madle of IISiUD, Oelh, tofailed locate any mre recent household incoms and ?xpenoiture StUdies Chan the NCAER's ( National Council for Acplied Economic Researcn ) -1'75 -i276 survey of House­

nolo Income ano its Disoosjtion wOnicn survey ,,as ,rot 7uoLisn-:d untii 19f80 ­indicating sore of the probiems of data-proce-.sinq in India ) nnd the iBRO "Staff Appraisal Report. Second 8onoay Water 2nd Sewerage Project" ( 19,8 )8 wnicn was used to establish the present redian uran incom of Rs.1200 ( Private Sector Housing Finance Program, India. Project Paper, Project No. 386-flG­

000, July 1981 ), in 1981.

Consequently, itwas decided to follow the saae .ethod of updating incores as that used in the Project Paper. The Centre for Monitoring the Indian Ecomriry ( CMIE: Basic Statistics, ALXgust 1982 ) forecasts a 7.3% increase in the consumfer price index from Decerrber, i981 ­ ecemoer, 1982

index Nunmers of Consumer Prices for induitrial !orkers, 1.939 - 1982 ). Us.ng simlae -xtrtaoolacion alone n'i nor :n:unCinu *-c -fnV reaL .nczea e in

LOO:reeucs, -Lu;uc:- -:-n,ncctre e-s ;nczaSa or ;-.7,:e eo~--7r~ a .czrn.e :21;--­to s. 12c8 a 2. A s in

n L3 -. sF I 9% ec. A? 3

ioulo oring te 'eoi n ujroan income t' "-is2. Jsc hec.u rSam Eormay wouio give an estimated rredian incomre of Rs.-1531 " e. IG2 nd Rs. 1778 ( Dec. 1983 ).

:t must ne stressed -,hac n-o real "ncrease in Incon s :-een taken into cnsideration, ano that th's is a ourel, iominal increase adjuszing for inflation; however, CMIE estimates a trend rate r.wth 3.3% in ReraoF of

National Income ­1971 1983.

"1i

[ncoma- G13ruup Rs. Month[|

1977

Under 200

201-450

451-700

701-1000

11[1]0-1500

1501-2000

2001-3000

31101-5000

Above 5000)

Not Recorded

Updated From: Pr'ivate

i1o,ziuI J..

f11l"CC, (;I.i, .IS. Ai~IIII

/ ut

tIfL.Ii

2Js-u "!

6 ?L- Iii

1,J- I IJI

1!A[I-L 2h

223%-_2j8 J

29 L- If 7tj

,47L - *151

Above '1451

Seictor H~ousinuj F eifIL

1)jstribution of totai Poouleticn of ,lre.atr florina.

Incone Group tfiflcorotuup Rs. 5'onth Rs. fvknLi,

1982 1983

x 7.3% x 9%

Under 320 ULlder 349 320-719 349-784 720-11. 785-220 Il2-15,J9 122[-1 743 1600-2398 L744-2614

2399-3198 2615-3486 3199-4796 3487-5228 4797-7994 5229-8713

Above 7994 Above 8"713

ri.ram, fndia. Project Paper, Project No.386-4111-0,

Iu tal PpuLatLion

%

2.75

L3.25 L6.00

L5. 95 31.96

1a. 15 5J. L1

[5.85 65. 96G

1.2. LO 78. 6

L! .132 89.68

6, 21 85.8

1.7 97.63 2.38 oo

100

.july 1981, p.35.