Aaradhya Avaan

• The plot is one site with two tenures, and the smaller share is the freehold one.
• Of 6,238.25 square metres, only C.S. 309 — 1,008.29 square metres, sixteen per cent — is freehold and owned by the first promoter.
• The other eighty-four per cent, C.S. 1/309 and 2/309, was compulsorily acquired by the state housing authority in 1983 and in 2000, and the property register cards of 17 October 2022 record MHADA as their holder.
• The promoters develop it under a registered joint development agreement of 28 October 2021, and what the buyers' association eventually receives is therefore two different things: a conveyance of the freehold sixth, and a 99-year lease at eleven rupees a year, with a renewal clause, over everything else.

• Wadia Ghandy and Co. opined on 28 December 2022 that title to the freehold parcel is clear and marketable and that both promoters are sufficiently entitled to develop the whole.
• That opinion carries four express conditions, and the third is the one that matters: it holds good provided no adverse order is passed in the litigation the report itself lists.
• Two Bombay High Court writ petitions remain live on the regulator's record and two tenant-compensation arbitrations sit before a retired Chief Justice.
• Every one of them concerns rehousing entitlement or the money payable for surrendering a tenancy — none touches the promoters' title — and the three earlier petitions that did challenge the scheme itself were settled by consent minutes in June 2022.
• All 266 eligible occupants have vacated, every structure on the plot is demolished, and possession is with the promoters.

• Three things are worth pinning down before signing.
• The only title opinion in the file is three and a half years old and is annexed unchanged to an agreement registered in July 2026, twelve months after the second two-hundred-crore charge it does not mention.
• The MHADA lease has not been executed, so neither its commencement date nor its renewal basis exists on paper — and on a MHADA lease renewal is a real premium, of the order of a quarter to a third of the reckoner value of the carpet area, borne by the society of the day rather than by the developer.
• And the housing authority's own development agreement forbids any mortgage over the portion comprising the rehousing component, while the charge in force is written over the development rights to the whole plot; nothing supplied shows how the two are reconciled.

• This is the part of the project that has gone well.
• Full commencement certificates cover all three towers to their sanctioned tops — the rehousing wing to its 38th floor in February 2024, Serano to its 58th in June 2024 and Oceano to its 61st in October 2024, each including the overhead tank and lift machine room — and the permit stands revalidated to 20 October 2026.
• No unit is sold above the sanctioned envelope, and unlike much of this portfolio there is no gap between what has been approved and what is being sold.

• The rehousing tower is structurally complete and ninety-two per cent finished internally.
• That is the cluster-redevelopment sequence working exactly as it is meant to, rehousing first, and it removes the single largest gate this kind of scheme carries.
• The 242 flats owed to the housing authority free of cost — approved for delivery not here but at a sister project of the same group — read as delivered, which is consistent with full certificates having issued at all, since the municipal approval made that handover a condition of further permission.

• On the two towers being sold, the public record is badly out of date and the ground is well ahead of it.
• The architect's certificate of 30 June 2025 recorded both still at podium, with none of Oceano's sixty-two superstructure slabs cast and two per cent of Serano's fifty-nine.
• Fourteen months later both have passed roughly the fortieth level above ground — something over twenty residential slabs each, which is an ordinary-to-good rate for a Mumbai high-rise and leaves about forty more per tower over the four years to December 2030.

• What tempers it is the horizon and the history.
• Possession is contracted for 31 December 2030 and the common areas' own occupancy certificate is proposed for 30 June 2031, six months later.
• The building permit falls due for renewal within two months of this reading.
• And the lineage is long: the first municipal approval and commencement certificate for this plot date from 2008, the scheme was first registered with the regulator under a different project name in August 2017, and that registration was cancelled in December 2022 and re-taken in January 2023 — which reset the completion date a buyer sees on a project that is nine years old on the regulator's own record.
• Neither promoter group yet has a completion record in this portfolio to test any of it against.

• The filing is thin rather than evasive, but thin enough to mislead anyone doing their own check.
• Only two promoter documents have ever been uploaded — a declaration and the title report, both from December 2022 — and nothing in the three and a half years since.
• Eleven of the twelve rows of the commencement-certificate table are blank, with a single undated entry against December 2025.

• Three fields are actively wrong to read at face value.
• The land-area field says 2,987.49 square metres; the registered agreement explains in its own recitals that this is the buildings' plinth area disclosed as the plot area, and the sanctioned plot is 6,238.25 — so the page halves the site and doubles the apparent intensity.
• Permissible and sanctioned built-up read 80,823.38 against the sanctioned sheet's 80,965.26, one amendment stale.
• And the three numbers shown as certificate extent — seventy-five, seventy-two and forty-two — are the total sanctioned level counts for each tower, not a certified floor extent at all.

• The encumbrance table is the one that would cost real money to misread.
• It lists the same asset twice, at two hundred and forty crore and at four hundred and forty crore, which reads naturally as six hundred and eighty.
• It is not: the promoters' own letter of 12 December 2025, with the registration index attached, shows a first facility of two hundred and forty crore from December 2022 and a second of two hundred crore from December 2025, sharing the same security equally.
• The total secured is four hundred and forty crore.

• Against all that, the record is clean where cleanliness counts.
• There are no complaints, no appeals and no non-compliance applications against this project at all.
• Both live writ petitions are disclosed.
• Both mortgages are disclosed.
• The parking table is fully expanded, tower by tower.
• The chartered accountant's annual report for 2024-25 is filed and unqualified.
• And every discrepancy above reconciles against the approved drawings, the registered agreement or the promoters' own letters — with the approved drawing governing.

• The height claims are unusually honest and worth saying so.
• Residences starting at 182 feet above ground level matches the sanctioned section's 55.40 metres to within seven centimetres.
• Reaching over a thousand feet is right at the elevation feature's 306.65 metres — though the terrace slab is 892 feet and the highest apartment floor 879, so the crown gets there and nobody stands on it.
• The locality claim is supported by the revenue division, the mortgage and the security trustee are disclosed on every page, and both promoter entities are named.

• The twin-tower headline is fair, and it is worth being precise about why.
• There are two sale towers, and a buyer of a sale flat is buying into a two-tower sale scheme; the legal footer of the developer's own floor plates sets out the full structure, two sale towers and one rehab-cum-sale tower, and the registered agreement describes the third in its recitals.
• What the brochure does not do is show that third tower on any site plan or tower-location key.
• The omission carries two things a buyer would want to know: two hundred and twenty further households share this podium, this gate and this single twelve-metre road, with no four-wheeler bays recorded against them at all; and the tower closes Serano's north face below its twentieth floor.

• The claim that does not hold is the 360-degree panorama.
• Of the four arcs the plates name, three are honest at some height — south open on both towers, west opening to real sea above roughly the fortieth floor, north open for Oceano.
• The east is not: the tower opposite closes it to about the thirty-fifth floor on both towers, and no marketing material anywhere prints a floor qualification against a face it labels on every plate it publishes.
• The lower-floor Oceano plate also labels one home and leaves the rest of the plate blank, and the club levels are sold on a floor numbering that does not match the sanctioned one.
• Nothing here is concealed or misstated — the disclosures exist, in the agreement and in the fine print — but the pattern throughout is omission from the document a buyer actually reads.

• Start with what is genuinely excellent, because it is the largest favourable fact about this building and the developer is right to sell it.
• Eighteen non-habitable levels sit below the first apartment — three basements, a ground floor, nine podium decks, eight robotic parking levels and a club floor — so the lowest home in either sale tower stands 55.40 metres above the road.
• Nothing in the near field is visible from any apartment: the registered west abutter, a hospital block of five to six floors, disappears thirty-five metres below the cheapest flat in the building.
• The usual low-floor view discount simply does not exist here, and the terrace at 271.90 metres puts the upper floors well above almost everything in this part of the city.

• Now the arcs the developer's own plates name, and the one that does not hold.
• On the east, Lodha Marq stands directly opposite on the same lane and closes the arc to somewhere around the thirty-fifth floor.
• That is roughly the lower three-fifths of each tower, it applies to Oceano and Serano alike, and no marketing material anywhere prints the floor at which it opens.
• This is the single largest view fact about the project, and it is why choosing the floor matters here more than choosing the tower.
• Behind Lodha Marq and much lower, Servai Tower is certified at 69.90 metres and clears above the sixth floor, which makes it a non-event for all but the very lowest homes.

• The other three arcs hold, at some height.
• The south — Queen's Necklace — is open on both towers.
• The west — Arabian Sea — is genuinely clean in the near and middle field, and beyond five hundred metres runs into the built ridge of Cumballa Hill, where Kalpataru Prive, Lodha Altamount, Antilia and Godrej Carmichael stand on ground about twenty metres higher than this plot, so the sea opens progressively and only properly from somewhere around the fortieth floor up.
• The north — Racecourse View — is where the two towers genuinely differ: it is open for Oceano, and for Serano it is the project's own rehousing tower, a 119.95-metre elevation with minimal fenestration that reads from the ground as a blank wall rather than as other people's windows, closing that face below Serano's twentieth floor.

• One reading has been withdrawn and it is worth saying plainly, because an earlier version of this report carried it.
• The two sale towers were assessed as walling roughly forty-six degrees of one another's marketed faces.
• They are set on a line and, on the ground, they do not — the angular figure came out of a centre-to-centre spacing that no drawing in the document set actually carries.
• It is withdrawn in full and nothing is asserted in its place.
• The practical conclusion is simpler than the one it replaces: the floor decides more than the tower.
• Below the thirty-fifth this is a two-arc apartment; above it, a three-arc one.
• The only tower-level difference left is Serano's north below its twentieth floor.

• Layout efficiency comes out at 82.2 per cent, which sits with Rustomjee Crown at 82 and Trilogy B at 81 in this portfolio, above Nautilus at 74 and below Kalpataru One at 94.
• The base is 87.2 per cent, taken straight from the sanctioned built-up-area summary for a typical Serano plate — 758.97 square metres of sanctioned built-up carrying five homes whose carpet areas, published by the developer on its own plate, total 661.64 square metres.

• From that base the calculation takes six points off for servant quarters that are tight at this price point.
• The two mid-plate homes get a servant room of six feet seven by five feet six; the four-bedroom gets a combined servant-and-utility of five feet seven by five feet eight.
• It adds one point back for deliberate dual aspect, because the plate is built around a central core with every home reaching two external faces and the four-bedroom running a long south arm with two twenty-foot balconies.
• There is no butterfly circulation, no long internal corridor, and no interior column marked in any living area.

• What this means in money: at the registered carpet rate of about 44,500 rupees a square foot, an efficiency of 82.2 per cent makes the effective rate 54,136 rupees a square foot of built-up area — and the fit-out for a raw bare shell sits on top of that again.
• The plates were confirmed as the reference drawings for this project, so the number is sealed rather than drafted.

• This is a clean negative and the plate settles it outright.
• Read at full resolution, the Serano core is a single shared lift lobby: one undivided corridor running between the two staircases and the fire lift on one side and the five passenger lifts on the other.
• The five lobby markers along that corridor each point at a door, and behind each door is that home's own foyer, drawn inside the apartment's wall line.
• There is no enclosed exclusive-use area outside anybody's front door anywhere on the plate.

• That matters because five homes to a floor is exactly the configuration the methodology flags for carved-out exclusive lobby area — the Crown pattern, where each flat takes a slice of the landing as its own and pays for space it does not own.
• This is the opposite arrangement: the Nautilus lobby-as-bonus configuration, where the common landing stays common and unbilled.
• Sharing the floor with four other homes does not change that, and it is the single cleanest attribute on this leaf.

• Balconies are a disclosed, separately stated feature and not a finding.
• The registered agreement's own definition of carpet area expressly excludes the exclusive balcony, verandah and open terrace appurtenant to a flat, and every plate prints the balcony area separately in both units of measure — 12.26 square metres on the Oceano five-bedroom, 4.45 to 20.16 across the Serano homes.
• Record those areas for the carpet-versus-total price arithmetic and go no further.
• The one thing worth confirming at handover is that the foyer inside the door is inside the carpet figure being charged for.

• There is a current, arm's-length data point here, which is more than most of this portfolio offers.
• A sale registered on 10 July 2026 prices 220.67 square metres of the developer's own published carpet at 10.57 crore rupees — about 44,500 a square foot — sold as a raw bare shell with no internal walls, no door frames, no electrical fittings, no finishes and no sanitary fittings.
• The declared consideration sits about two per cent above the government valuation of 10.33 crore, which is to say essentially at the reckoner floor.

• The same developer's five-bedroom home is quoted publicly at 25.64 crore.
• Measured against the 3,033 square feet of carpet the developer's own plate publishes for that home, that is about 84,500 rupees a square foot — on the identical denominator.
• The ratio is 1.90, and an area-basis mismatch does not explain it, because both figures use the carpet the developer publishes.
• Three explanations survive: the registered sale is a bare shell and the quoted product may be presented fitted; the quoted rate may simply be an asking rate nothing has transacted at; or part of the consideration sits outside the registered instrument.
• Nothing in the documents suggests the third and this is not an allegation — but it is the one question that can unwind an apparent discount entirely, it is never in the papers, and it belongs in front of a buyer rather than in a footnote.

• Two adjustments belong on top of whatever number is agreed.
• At the sealed 82.2 per cent layout efficiency, 44,500 a square foot of carpet is an effective 54,136 a square foot of built-up area.
• And the fit-out of a bare shell — every internal wall, every fitting — sits on top of that again.
• Tardeo and Nana Chowk is a new micro-market for this portfolio and has no comparable band yet, so this score is provisional on one being fed.

• On the capital side the picture is better than the headline debt suggests.
• Four hundred and forty crore is secured across two equal-ranking bank facilities, on a package covering the freehold land, both promoters' development rights over the whole plot, the project assets, an exclusive first charge over receivables present and future, and a lien on the accounts; the development agreement repays it in priority out of the majority partner's own 87.4 per cent share, with personal guarantees behind it.
• But the regulator's own test comes out the ordinary way: the chartered accountant's report for 2024-25 applies the standard seventy-per-cent escrow condition rather than the hundred-per-cent form reserved for projects whose receivables fall short of their cost to complete, records 192.46 crore collected, 140.11 crore deposited against 134.72 required — an excess of 5.39 crore — and carries no qualifications and no observations at all.

• This is a dense site and the approvals say so in their own words.
• Three towers and 545 households sit on 6,238.25 square metres — about 11.4 square metres of ground per household — with 643 square metres of recreational open space between all of them, roughly 1.2 square metres a home.
• The municipal approvals separately charge a premium for condonation of deficient open spaces, and require a registered undertaking that the buyer be told the buildings are constructed with an open-space deficiency.

• The rehousing component is housed in the third tower: 220 homes over thirty-eight floors at the north end of the plot, complete and internally finished.
• The six and forty rehousing units the regulator's summary records against the two sale towers are floor-area accounting entries rather than rehoused households — the sale towers are wholly sale — so that is a question about how the building's floor area was earned rather than about who lives on the landing.

• All three towers share one podium, one basement raft and one plot.
• The sanctioned ground-floor sheet draws separate sale and rehousing gates off the twelve-and-a-fifth-metre road, and a separate society office, panel room and building-management room for the rehousing wing, so the two components are kept apart by design rather than by accident.
• The density fact that actually reaches the street is that the rehousing tower is recorded with zero four-wheeler parking for its 220 households.

• The Development Plan remarks of 22 February 2021 record the land in the residential zone and abutting a private hospital.
• That hospital forms the entire west boundary — an amenity, certainly, and also a source of round-the-clock ambulance and visitor traffic on a road twelve and a fifth metres wide that already carries both of this compound's own gates.
• The wider location is genuinely good: Nariman Point 5.4 kilometres, Lower Parel 5.3, Ballard Estate 4.9, with Tardeo's own retail and schools within walking distance.

• Two things are moving in the immediate field.
• Lodha Marq is rising on the same lane about eighty metres off the east face.
• And the ten cadastral numbers lying west and north-west of this plot, between it and Javji Dadaji Marg, are the balance of the Larger Land as the registered sale agreement defines it — on which the promoters say they propose a further 72,000 square metres of floor area.
• On their own recitals they are still obtaining the consents and rights for that land from the people who hold it, and it is occupied; so it is an intention rather than a scheduled event, but it is an intention aimed at the arc this building's marketing calls the Arabian Sea view.

• Further out, the north-east arc already carries the Mahalaxmi and Jacob Circle cluster between 1.4 and 2.1 kilometres away, including one tower that stands above this building's own terrace.
• And on the compound itself, 220 rehoused households will live here with no parking provided for them at all, which puts whatever they own onto the same twelve-metre road as everyone else's visitors.

• Eighteen minutes at eleven on a weekday morning from the gate to the nearest coastal-road entry node, measured on the ground rather than modelled.
• The plot sits inland of the coastal corridor, behind the Tardeo and Pedder Road bottlenecks, and its only frontage is a single twelve-and-a-fifth-metre municipal road that carries both the sale and the rehousing gates.

• What the location does have is centrality of a different kind - Nariman Point at 5.4 kilometres, Lower Parel at 5.3, Ballard Estate at 4.9 - so the weakness here is specifically the run to the coastal road rather than access in general.
• Nothing in the surrounding pipeline changes that: the constraint is the two bottlenecks between this plot and the sea, not the last mile, and no announced road scheme relieves either.

• A pass on every plate in the Tardeo set, and not a marginal one.
• Each kitchen sits on the building envelope with a dedicated exterior air path beside it, so nothing depends on mechanical recirculation.
• The Oceano five-bedroom puts a kitchen of nine by fifteen feet against the east face, with a utility of twelve feet by three feet ten inches and a service shaft on the outer wall.

• On the Serano plate the two Luxe homes get a kitchen of nine feet four by thirteen feet six with an adjoining service room and service toilet on the envelope; the two Suite homes get a kitchen of eleven by eight feet with a utility of two feet eleven by six feet one on the outer wall; and the four-bedroom's kitchen of eight feet six by thirteen feet ten adjoins a combined service room and utility on the north face.
• No kitchen anywhere on either plate is drawn as an internal, recirculation-only space, which at this price point is what you would expect and is not always what you get.

• Each sale tower has five passenger lifts plus a dedicated fire lift, drawn as a single bank flanked by two staircases and a fire lobby.
• Run on this building's real geometry rather than a generic assumption — a residential floor-to-floor of 3.50 metres and a measured eightieth-percentile height of 228.6 metres for Oceano and 220.2 for Serano — the waiting interval comes out at thirty-two to forty-three seconds for Oceano over sixty-one floors at about 2.4 homes a floor, and thirty-two to forty-two seconds for Serano over fifty-eight floors at five homes a floor.

• Every corner of the luxury band returns grade B.
• It never falls to C or D at any combination of speed and capacity tested, so the grade is robust and seals on the conservative end rather than the flattering one.
• Two caveats travel with it.
• The same lift bank also serves nine podium decks, a ground lobby and two club levels, which adds landings the model does not count.
• And lift speed and capacity appear on no drawing in the folder — they live on a lift schedule that was not supplied — which is why the calculation was run as a band rather than as a single point.

• The municipal approvals require the hydraulic engineer's remarks before commencement, compliance with that department's no-objection before occupation, and a separate no-objection for the swimming pool at the topmost podium; extra water and sewerage charges are payable.
• Full commencement certificates have since issued for all three towers, which implies the before-commencement remarks were in fact submitted — and that is the strongest thing the file will support.

• What is not in the folder is the no-objection itself.
• Without it, the tenement or population basis on which water has been allowed cannot be compared against the 545 households actually sanctioned on this plot, and that comparison is the whole of this attribute.
• There is no adverse condition anywhere in the approvals and no sign of a shortfall; there is simply no document to seal it against, so the score sits neutral until one is produced.

• Parking here is two-tier by design and the two halves score very differently.
• A ramp climbs from three basements up through nine podium decks; above the ninth, a central robotic unit with its own machine room serves eight further levels with no ramp at all.
• Twenty parking levels in total is the deepest stack in this portfolio — and it is also, directly, what lifts the first apartment to 55.40 metres and buys the building its low-floor view.
• The trade-off is real and it is stated in both places.

• What is good is genuinely good.
• The two ramps are one-way and split between the towers — Serano's is the entry and climbs, Oceano's is the exit and descends — which is the best arrangement the rubric recognises and removes the single-two-way-ramp penalty outright; on a compound with 1,049 sanctioned bays and one twelve-metre frontage, separating entry from exit is worth more than the half point it saves.
• Nine decks can be driven to.
• The ratio is generous, at 480 four-wheeler bays for Oceano's 136 homes and 569 for Serano's 189.
• And nothing sits against a habitable room, because every parking level including the robotic stack is below the club floor at 51.45 metres and the first apartment at 55.40.

• What is not good is a shorter list but a daily one.
• The regulator's own table records zero visitor bays across all three towers, and zero parking of any kind for the rehousing tower's 220 households — on a road twelve and a fifth metres wide carrying both gates.
• The bay is allotted and licensed rather than deeded, and only about half the inventory has been allotted at all.
• The approvals required a registered undertaking that tandem parking would be allotted to buyers and rehousing tenements and that buyers would be made aware before signing, so part of the stock is two-deep.
• And six to seven levels of machine-dependent stock is a great deal on a plot this size.

• The retrieval time splits entirely on a number no document in the document set gives.
• Modelled across a morning peak window, four retrieval machines a tower return a wait of about a minute to a minute and a half at every point in the band; two machines saturate and run to nine and a half minutes at Serano.
• That is the difference between a non-issue and a daily irritation, and it is one specification a buyer can insist on seeing before signing.

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.

• Three hundred and twenty-five sale homes sit in two towers at the south and middle of the plot; 220 rehoused households sit in a third at the north.
• The separation is architectural rather than incidental: distinct sale and rehousing entry gates off the road, a separate society office, panel room and building-management room for the rehousing wing, and the sale towers' entire club provision on their own podium and at their own thirty-fourth floor.

• The sale towers are wholly sale, so there is no in-tower co-habitation to price — the six and forty rehousing units the regulator records against them are floor-area accounting entries, not neighbours.
• What remains is the ordinary cluster-redevelopment question, and it is a real one rather than a theoretical one: 220 rehoused households and 325 buyers share one compound, one podium and one twelve-metre road, and the rehoused households have no parking provided for them at all.

• The buying mix itself is squarely high-net-worth — three, four and five-bedroom homes of 116 to 282 square metres of carpet, whole-floor five-bedroom plates on Oceano's lower band, at ten crore and up, sold as bare shells that each buyer fits out themselves.
• Whether the two components form one society or separate ones is not settled in any document supplied, and it is the question that decides how the compound is actually run.