Detailed Report · as of 06/26

Sugee Marina Bay

Worli Sea Face — delivered & best-connected; the catch is disclosure · RERA P51900011592

RERA registered P51900011592 · Occupancy Certificate received June 2026 (delivered) · 45 floors built and certified vs 53 marketed (total, from ground) — a permanent 8-floor overstatement · analysed against the registered documents, the agreement for sale, and Rexray field analysis

Overall Score6.9/10as of 06/26
Flags
  1. Rule 6 (active MCGM lien on 1,459.89 sqm, no confirmed removal timeline) — ACTIVE pending post-OC title check; Rule 4 (…

A delivered, sea-facing home with the best connectivity in South Mumbai and — on the top floors — a protected west sea.

The INVESTIGATE survives even though the build risk is gone (it's delivered, OC June 2026): 53 floors are marketed against the 45 actually certified — a permanent overstatement — the municipal (MCGM) leasehold isn't disclosed, ~31% of the plot's contents are hidden, an MCGM lien needs confirming as discharged, and the registered price points to the corpus's heaviest cash component. The flat and the location are real; the paperwork and positioning are why you investigate, not Rexray’s proprietary FVL (Fundamentals · Value · Livability) index.

The five things that decide it
1It's DELIVERED (OC June '26) — no construction risk left, which sets it apart from every under-construction project here — with the best connectivity in South Mumbai (~4 min to the coastal road, improving). It's also Sugee's first delivered luxury project, so you can inspect the real finish rather than trust a render.
2On the top floors, Unit 1's west sea is genuinely protected — its upper band (38–45) is among the better-protected sea views in the Worli corpus.
353 floors were marketed against the 45 actually built and OC-certified. Because it's delivered, that's a permanent overstatement, not something that can still be completed higher.
4disclosure gaps: the municipal (MCGM) leasehold tenure isn't surfaced in marketing (the site is silent on land), and ~31% of the plot (two rehab buildings, a municipal school, municipal housing) is absent from it. The lease itself is economically benign — BMC renewal premiums are negligible — so this is a transparency issue, not a value one.
5the view is unit- and floor-specific, not the blanket sea the marketing implies: Unit 1's west sea is clear only on the top ~8 floors (an existing coastal wall blocks 10–37); Unit 4's south is blocked by neighbouring Worli towers; Unit 2 faces a stalled litigation plot. (A previously-flagged MCGM lien is very likely cleared now that the OC has issued — confirm.)
FVL — Rexray's index · F Fundamentals · V Value · L Livability · each pillar is the average of its scored attributes, scored 0–10: Weak (<4) · Mixed (4–6) · Fair (6–7.5) · Strong (7.5+) · the verdict is set separately, by hard-stop rules · Scoring Methodology →

Fundamentals

6.5/10Fair

Pillar score is the average of the scored attributes below; some attributes are qualitative and carry questions rather than a number.

Clear Title7/10
A benign municipal leasehold — a better landlord type than MHADA — with two paperwork flags.
  • The land is municipal (MCGM) under DC Regulation 33(7), with the developer holding development rights and the lease deed not yet executed.
  • Crucially this is a BMC/municipal lease, not MHADA — renewal premiums are negligible, so economically it's close to freehold in practice.
  • The Occupancy Certificate (June 2026) is strong evidence the city has no outstanding lien blocker.
  • The two flags are paperwork: the lease deed is unexecuted, and the leasehold tenure isn't surfaced in the marketing.
Worth knowing — this is a BMC/municipal (MCGM) lease, not MHADA — renewal premiums are negligible, so economically it's close to freehold. The two flags: the lease deed is unexecuted, and the leasehold isn't disclosed in the marketing — confirm the earlier MCGM lien has been discharged (the OC suggests it has).
What to ask the builder
  • Is the lease deed executed, and has the earlier MCGM lien on the sale plot been discharged?
Understand “Clear Title” on the X-Ray page ↗
Deliveryqualitative
Finished and OC'd — and it doubles as the builder's benchmark.
  • This is the one delivered project in South Mumbai: the Occupancy Certificate was received in June 2026, so there is no forward construction risk — a real differentiator from every under-construction project here.
  • The caveat is history, not future: it ran about three years late, an engineered delay tied to a commercially-motivated floor addition.
Understand “Delivery” on the X-Ray page ↗
Developer Compliance6/10
Clean documents — undercut by positioning and stale data.
  • (How we score this: filing frequency, document legibility and up-to-dateness on the RERA website, then specific flags.)
  • The documents themselves are clean, but the positioning isn't: a municipal leasehold is marketed as freehold, and 53 floors are marketed against the 45 actually built and certified.
  • Recourse runs against the registered promoter, Saumya Buildcon.
Understand “Developer Compliance” on the X-Ray page ↗
Brochure-vs-Realityqualitative
This is Sugee's first delivered luxury project — so you can see the record, not guess it.
  • Because it's delivered, you can read Sugee's record rather than guess it — a rare advantage in this set.
  • What the record shows against the marketing: 53 floors marketed versus 45 built and OC-certified (a permanent overstatement now, not something that can still be 'corrected'), the municipal leasehold positioned as freehold, and about 31% of the plot's contents — two rehab buildings, a municipal school and municipal housing — left out of the marketing.
What to ask the builder
  • Is this land freehold or municipal leasehold — and is there any lien on the sale plot?
  • How many floors are in the Occupancy Certificate vs the marketing?
  • What's the registered pipeline in front of this tower along the sea face?
Understand “Brochure-vs-Reality” on the X-Ray page ↗

Value

7.3/10Fair

Pillar score is the average of the scored attributes below; some attributes are qualitative and carry questions rather than a number.

View7/10
West sea is open from the upper floors and only partial lower down — but not a 'lifetime open' view.
  • The analysed unit (the larger west-facing Unit 1) sits above the ~37-floor coastal building row, so its west sea is genuinely open — its upper band is among the better-protected sea views in the Worli corpus, and the Police Quarters on the western boundary is angularly offset from its main sea axis.
  • Lower floors are screened by the coastal row but, because the bay is wide, keep a partial sea rather than a full block.
  • The honest caveat: this is not a 'lifetime open' sea view — planned development along the sea face means you shouldn't pay a premium for permanence.
Today: the analysed top-floor unit's west sea is open; lower floors keep a partial sea over the coastal rowBy 2032: planned sea-face development means it isn't a 'lifetime open' view — don't pay a premium for permanence
Worli view-corridor map — the surrounding pipeline (legend inside)
Worli sea-view corridor — satellite map of the surrounding development pipeline
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
Pipeline Legend
Rexray · June 2026
A
Siddharth Nagar SRA80+ floors
B
Prestige Miriam Nagar SRA4–5 towers × 75+ floors
C
BDD Chawls33×40F rehab + 10×80F sale
D
Worli Police Colony~40F quarters + 50+ sale
E
Sumitomo / Bombay Dyeing22ac · 50F comm + 70F resi · JPY 500B
F
Lodha ProminoComm at 39fl + Resi (Unnamed) at 69fl + 3 Rehabs (48fl each)
G
Sterling / Worli Dairy SRA38F · blocks Trilogy F15–38
H
Lodha Seaface (KAGK Rd)~50F · coastal wall
I
Sewage Treatment PlantExisting · monsoon odour risk
J
Aspect Realty (opp. Raaya)57F · RERA pending
K
Birla Century Textiles 10ac50F comm + resi · N of Niyaara
L
Coastal Road Slum (L-shape)SRA-probable 40–50F
M
Oberoi Mall/CommercialPandurang Budkar Marg · TBD
What to ask the builder
  • For my specific unit and floor, what's open today, and what's the registered pipeline in front along the sea face?
Understand “View” on the X-Ray page ↗
Layout & Living6.0/10
Single-aspect and modest-ceilinged on the sea unit; the side units live better.
  • On the analysed sea-facing Unit 1, efficiency is a modest 75%, with a single west aspect and a 3.2m ceiling, though it does have a Separate Servant Entry.
  • The side units (2 and 4) are east–west dual-aspect and live better.
  • So the layout is the trade for the sea — adequate rather than excellent on this unit.
  • The exposed-face glass specification is the open item.
How we scored this
6.0/10  3 of 5 components live
weighted: efficiency 40 · aspect 20 · ceiling 20 · servant 10 (re-normalised /0.9; heat-glass 10 pending)
  • LES from floor plan: 75% → 5.5 · registered documents approx
  • vs 12ft luxury benchmark: 3.2m → 5 · Rexray analysis
  • Separate Servant Entry: yes → 9 · Rexray analysis
  • which way the home faces (from the floor plan): W single — Unit 01 (units 2,4 are E-W dual → higher) → 7 · Rexray analysis
  • Quality of Window/Railing Glass (Glazing, Heat Trapping, Brand) — buyer question: PENDING · Rexray analysis PENDING
efficiency+aspect+ceiling+servant live; only glass (10%) pending
Fixable? Layout, ceiling and aspect are fixed at construction. Glass thermal performance is a spec the buyer can probe pre-purchase but cannot change after.
What to ask the builder
  • The west-face glass specification — brand, glazing thickness, and the heat-trapping (SHGC / U-value) number.
Understand “Layout & Living” on the X-Ray page ↗
Non-RERA Area9/10
Clean — nothing you pay for but don't own.

Clean — there's no foyer or 'private lobby' Non-RERA-area trap. You own everything you pay for.

How we scored this
severity by % of carpet (>25 HIGH · 15-25 MED-HIGH · 5-15 MED · <5 LOW); a deduction only if BMC enforcement is already active — for this home it is not applicable, because these notices surface only after residents move in (see the Rustomjee Crown Example); −1 no-floor area (FSI)-to-legalise (forever); +0.5 if disclosed in the agreement
  • from the agreement / floor plan: None · registered documents PENDING
  • carpet sqft: 3155 · registered documents
  • bmc enforcement: none · Rexray analysis
  • fsi to legalise: None · registered documents PENDING
no foyer confirmed
Fixable? no RCA — nothing to remediate
Understand “Non-RERA Area” on the X-Ray page ↗
Pricingqualitative
What it costs — and the largest off-paper gap in South Mumbai.
  • The analysed unit registered at about Rs.18.5 crore — roughly Rs.56,000 per sqft on carpet.
  • That is the flag: for a delivered, sea-facing Worli home that registered rate is well below the market, pointing to the largest off-paper cash component in South Mumbai.
  • Treat the registered figure as a floor, establish the all-in number, and price the cash question into the deal.
What to ask the builder
  • What is the all-in cost — including stamp duty, registration and goods-and-services tax (GST)?
  • What is the rate on the area I actually own (carpet plus deck) versus the marketed area?
  • What have recent apartments in this building / micro-market actually registered at?
Understand “Pricing” on the X-Ray page ↗

Livability

7.6/10Strong

Pillar score is the average of the scored attributes below; some attributes are qualitative and carry questions rather than a number.

Compound Density5/10
A mixed compound — a heavy rehab building, but physically separated.
  • The compound is mixed.
  • A genuine PAP/BMC-rehab building (151 flats — a heavier festival and two-wheeler cohabitant vector) shares the plot, but it's physically separated to the west; alongside it sits the middle-class Prerna building and some institutional reservations (a municipal school, municipal housing).
  • The heavy rehab component holds the score at 5 — above the worst in South Mumbai because of the west-separation and the middle-class share, but below a purely middle-class compound.
How we scored this
5/10  
density band x cohabitant-type weight (heavy PAP/BMC rehab dominates), + separation modifier
  • sale units: 134 · registered documents
  • BMC rehab = rehab/SRA category, HEAVY vector — NOT Prerna: 151 flats (Rehab Bldg 1) · registered documents
  • light vector; on-plot-vs-adjacent minor-open: middle-class, occupied, Sasmira Rd left of entrance · Rexray analysis
  • rehab separation: PAP physically separate, west · registered documents
  • occupancy profile not load-bearing for score: MCGM housing · registered documents minor-open
solid — Prerna/PAP distinction now resolved (was the prior PENDING)
Fixable? Compound composition is fixed at construction — no developer or legal lever. This is the compound the buyer permanently shares; it does not change.
Understand “Compound Density” on the X-Ray page ↗
Neighbourhood6/10
A quiet lane with unusually good future access.
  • The neighbourhood is a quiet Sasmira Road pocket off Annie Besant — a bus depot is the only real generator, so it doesn't inherit Annie Besant's traffic — and a left exit reaches the Sea Link / Worli connector points, which is genuinely good future access.
  • The surrounding pipeline is low.
  • The industrial-heritage character is the only real drag.
How we scored this
6/10  
neighbourhood character + low pipeline + access/connectivity lift
  • road: Sasmira Rd — quiet (bus depot only) · Rexray analysis
  • connectivity: off Annie Besant; left → Sea Link / Worli connector (future) · Rexray analysis
  • pipeline: low; no flagged mega-pipeline · Rexray analysis
  • character: industrial-Worli (Sasmira) pocket · Rexray analysis
solid
Fixable? Surrounding development and the access road are outside the developer's control. The lever is honesty about the neighbourhood's trajectory by 2032, not a fix.
Understand “Neighbourhood” on the X-Ray page ↗
Peak-Hour Connectivity9/10
The best in South Mumbai — and it gets better.
  • Connectivity is the standout strength: about 4 minutes to the coastal-road on-ramp at 11am today, the best in South Mumbai.
  • And it's the only project that improves — the future Worli–Sewri / Sea Link connector shortens it toward 3–4 minutes by 2032, an external civic gain rather than anything the developer controls.
How we scored this
score = band(peak minutes to nearest fast-artery on-ramp); future = today x (SRD pipeline · road headroom)
  • GMaps 11am -> Godrej Bay View: 4 min · Rexray analysis
  • road headroom: future Worli-Sewri / Sea Link connector shortens it — only project that gets better · Rexray analysis
  • directional band, not a measured future time: · Rexray analysis PROJECTION
today verified (measured); future is a directional projection from the SRD pipeline
Fixable? Builders like to sell connectivity as kilometres from a landmark — but the real test is time, not distance: how long you would actually be stuck, at peak hour, just getting to a fast arterial like a Sea Link or Coastal Road on-ramp. The access route and the on-ramp are municipal and outside the developer's control, so there is no fix to offer — only an honest read of the peak-hour reality today and the area's trajectory by 2032, once the surrounding pipeline has built out.
Understand “Peak-Hour Connectivity” on the X-Ray page ↗
Kitchen Ventilation9/10
Passes — all four units have a confirmed exterior air path.

Kitchen ventilation passes: all four units have a confirmed exterior air path (one north-facing dry balcony is pending a field check).

How we scored this
9  
PASS=9 · conditional=8 · WARN=6 · FAIL=3 (FAIL=HIGH severity at ₹10Cr+)
  • all 4 units PASS; Unit 03 N-facing dry balcony pending field: PASS · registered documents
sealed from floor plan
Fixable? clean external air path — no fix needed
Understand “Kitchen Ventilation” on the X-Ray page ↗
Lift Wait9/10
Essentially no wait — top grade, four homes per floor on six passenger lifts.
  • There's essentially no lift wait.
  • Four homes per floor are served by six passenger lifts (plus a service and a fire car), giving a peak interval of about 20 seconds — Grade A.
  • And because it's delivered, this is the real building, not a projection.
The wait, at peak rush hour: essentially none — Grade A, about a 20-second peak interval, with four homes per floor on six passenger lifts (plus a service and a fire car). And it's delivered, so this is the real building, not a projection.
How we scored this
CIBSE (Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers) Guide D: RTT=2·(0.8N·f2f/speed·1.15)+S·13; S=N·(1−((N−1)/N)^P); interval=RTT/lifts ÷ DCEF
  • from total floors − podium: 40 · registered documents
  • passenger lifts: 6 · Rexray analysis
  • units per floor: 4 · Rexray analysis
  • ≈ ceiling + slab: 3.7 · Rexray analysis assumption
  • spec unconfirmed — sensitivity band: 4–6 m/s · Rexray analysis assumption
grade robust to loading (P=4–6); lift-speed spec is the swing for the tallest towers
Fixable? clean Grade A — no fix needed
Understand “Lift Wait” on the X-Ray page ↗
Water Adequacy8/10
Passes — and it's delivered, so the connection physically exists.

Water adequacy passes: a single baseline water and sewerage dues line, with no escalator. And because the project is delivered, the connection physically exists rather than being a sanction on paper.

Understand “Water Adequacy” on the X-Ray page ↗
Parking7.0/10
Podium parking, roughly three bays per home - access type to confirm
  • About 417 bays across nine podium levels for 134 homes - a generous ratio - allotted at the developer's discretion near possession.
  • As a mid-large tower it's most likely drive-up self-park, but the agreement doesn't name the mechanism, so confirm it from the podium plan.
Understand “Parking” on the X-Ray page ↗
Build Planning & Qualitynot yet scored
A checklist to verify with the builder — Rexray will score this attribute as the field database grows.

Rexray's database will, over time, be enriched with the attention to detail and quality ethos of each builder. For now, below is the checklist you should verify with the builder before you decide.

What to ask the builder
  • Who's the architect, and what comparable have they delivered?
  • Do the lobbies need lights during the day?
  • Gym/pool/lobby sized for how many residents? (gym sqft / residents)
  • Does this unit's layout meet your Vastu requirements (entry, kitchen, master)?
  • Can a fire tender or an ambulance reach the lobby?
  • Who is actually building it?
  • Mivan or conventional — and how are the tie-holes grouted and cracks controlled?
  • What's the realistic floor-cycle, and how does the monsoon factor in?
  • Which steel/cement? Facade glazing spec? MEP contractor? STP/solar?
  • Which marble/fittings exactly? Which window system? VRV brand?
  • Deck/bathroom waterproofing system? How's the facade sealed into the structure?
  • Gypsum or block internal walls — and are the party walls insulated?
  • Does the back-up generator power my whole flat, or only the common areas?
  • Is the parking solo, tandem, or a mechanical stack — and how wide are the bays?
Understand “Build Planning & Quality” on the X-Ray page ↗
Communityqualitative
A more mixed, business-leaning profile — and two different cohabitant gentries.
  • On a field read the sale building skews more mixed and business-leaning.
  • And the compound carries two different cohabitant gentries — the heavier PAP/BMC-rehab population to the west, and the middle-class Prerna building — a more varied community mix than the single-profile towers in South Mumbai.
What to ask the builder
  • What is the ticket-size range in the building — the gap between the cheapest and the most expensive home?
  • Is the building vegetarian-only, or skewed to a single community?
  • Is it owner-occupied, or investor- and tenant-heavy?
  • What is the pet policy?
Understand “Community” on the X-Ray page ↗

Findings register

16 findings · severity-ranked

Every marketed claim set against the documented fact, sourced. Critical and high first.

CRITICAL
MCGM land marketed as freehold — no executed lease deed, property card in MCGM name
MarketedFreehold
DocumentedMCGM-owned; Prerna CHS only a proposed lessee; lease deed never executed/registered; development rights under DC 33(7) only
The 'freehold' claim is false on every registered document — the city still owns this land and no lease has even been signed.
Source: registered documents, secondary sources, marketing
CRITICAL
53 floors marketed vs 45 built and OC'd — permanent misrepresentation
Marketed53 floors
Documented45 residential top floor, built and certified — an 8-floor (15%) gap now permanent
The building is finished; the marketed eight extra floors will never exist.
Source: registered documents, Rexray analysis
CRITICAL
MCGM lien on 1,459.89 sqm of the sale plot — balance capitalised value unpaid
DocumentedLien active until post-OC title check confirms clearance — the remaining hard stop on this project
The city holds a lien over a fifth of the sale plot; until it clears, this stays a hard stop.
Source: secondary sources
HIGH
Two rehab buildings + municipal school + municipal housing — 31% of plot undisclosed
MarketedStandalone sea-face tower framing
DocumentedRehab Bldg 1 (OC'd), planned Rehab Bldg 2, 1,264 sqm school + 1,190 sqm municipal housing reservations — none in marketing
Nearly a third of the compound is rehabilitation and municipal reservations the marketing never shows.
Source: registered documents
HIGH
Engineered delay — RERA extension to accommodate commercially-motivated floor addition
DocumentedExtension 1 applied exactly 22 days after the Rehab Bldg 1 OC that unlocked +8 floors of PAP floor area (FSI); total delay 3.5yrs over a 9yr project; undisclosed to buyers
The decision to add eight saleable floors and the decision to delay buyers were made in the same 22-day window — delay-by-design, now OC-confirmed.
Source: registered documents
HIGH
DC 33(7) floor area (FSI) mechanism undisclosed — delay-by-design confirmed
DocumentedBuyers in possession today bought under original 37-floor/Jan-2023 representations; the 37→45 extension and its 3-year delay cost were never disclosed
Today's residents signed for a different, shorter building delivered three years earlier than what actually happened.
Source: registered documents
HIGH
Municipal school (1,264 sqm) reserved on compound — absent from marketing
DocumentedSchool reservation on that land parcel in no marketing material
A municipal school is reserved inside the compound; buyers learn it from the building approval plan, not the brochure.
Source: registered documents
HIGH
KAGK Road coastal wall — sea view blocked for floors 10–37; top 8 floors clear
MarketedSea-face positioning across all floors
DocumentedKhan Abdul Gaffar Khan Road sits right on the coast at 250–350m; existing towers already define the wall — this is confirmed, not projected
Only the top eight floors (38–45) own the unbroken sea view the project name promises.
Source: Rexray analysis, marketing
MED-HIGH
Police Quarters on western boundary — floor area (FSI)-4 policy, angular offset from main sea axis
DocumentedSir Pochkhanawala Rd quarters; redevelopment policy active; INS TRATA naval land buffers the far north-west
A policy-stage threat sitting at an angle to — not across — the marketed sea view.
Source: government filings, Rexray analysis
MED-HIGH
Grey litigation plot (20+yr stalled) at ~50–75m in Unit 02's east corridor
DocumentedUnit-02-specific exposure; resolution of the stalled litigation would put a tower at very close range
Unit 02 buyers face a dormant plot at touching distance whose litigation could resolve at any time.
Source: Rexray analysis
MEDIUM
CRZ zone undisclosed — all NOCs obtained
DocumentedCRZ III + CRZ II at layout RG; clearances in place
CRZ status was never disclosed, but the clearance paperwork is complete.
Source: registered documents, government filings
MEDIUM
RT1.4/ET1.4 grey blocks north — identity unconfirmed
DocumentedGrey blocks north of Marina Bay; NOT BDD Chawls (BDD is on GM Bhosle Road)
Northern grey blocks on the Development Plan need identification before the north arc can be sealed.
Source: government filings
MEDIUM
Adarsh Nagar (Adani highest bidder) — northeast angle, north-bedroom impact
Documented34.33 acres floor area (FSI)-4 at ~400–600m NE — affects northern bedroom windows, not the main west sea balcony
Material for the north windows, immaterial for the marquee view.
Source: government filings, marketing
LOW-MED
Uncapped maintenance charges at developer discretion until society formation
DocumentedNo cap; actuals pending field intelligence
Until the society forms, the developer names the maintenance number.
Source: registered documents
LOW
SBI mortgage on 134 units — reference unit excluded, resolved
DocumentedMortgage exactly matches sale unit count; prior ECL/Beacon charges cancelled Dec 2019
Standard construction finance, cleanly resolved.
Source: registered documents
LOW
Mercator suit settled — NDC confirmed
DocumentedCommercial Suit 94/2016 fully closed
Historical, resolved.
Source: secondary sources
Five questions to ask before you commit
  1. The executed lease deed, and written confirmation the earlier MCGM lien has been discharged (the OC suggests it has).
  2. Why the project is marketed at 53 floors when it's OC'd at 45.
  3. For a side/east unit: the status and development potential of the stalled litigation plot in the east corridor — it could block that unit's view if it's ever built.
  4. The uncapped maintenance charges until society formation — get the cap and the handover timeline.
Rexray — Real Estate X-Ray. This is a research view built from registered documents, government filings, and Rexray field analysis; it is not legal, financial, or investment advice. Verify every figure against the source documents before you transact.