Pincode 411045

Pincode 411045, filed under the locality names Baner and Balewadi, holds 765 MahaRERA registrations. The newest was registered on 3 September 2026.

761 of the 765 registrations here file their district as Pune; the other 4 file none.

When this market was built out, and what each vintage has become. Registration dates are filed on every project, so this is the one long-run series the filings support in full.

What the 765 registrations here have become, as filed today.

Unit totals cover the 300 projects that file a count; the rest file none.

Registrations that died with buyers inside

18 registrations here lapsed or were revoked at 50% sold or better, each a filed precedent of this locality taking money and not delivering a registration:

• 100% soldGalaxy · Lapsed · 37 units
• 100% soldPrimus B Wing · Lapsed · 6 units
• 99.6% soldVTP Aethereus- Phase1 · Lapsed · 718 units
• 99.4% soldVTP Aethereus phase2 · Lapsed · 476 units
• 98.9% soldAldea Espanola Phase VIII · Lapsed · 88 units

The 25 largest of the 273 Active registrations here, largest first; the other 248 are inside every aggregate in this report.

Largest first, by the unit count in the filing: the order is a fact about size, never a rank. MahaRERA files no unit type, no carpet area and no price, so no table built from it can name a better or worse buy. A cell reading "not filed" describes the filing, not the project.

Bookings and progress per month divide by months since registration, so a project registered last year and one registered six years ago compare fairly; a rate renders only when both of its inputs are filed. Progress is the mean of the RERA activity checklist as filed, capped at 100.

To compare a shortlist of two to six of these in depth, project by project and each positioned against its whole district, the Project Comparison Matrix at reragenie.com/reports/ does that job.

When the active stock here promises to land. 6 projects are already past the promised date, holding 201 filed units.

How far possession promises here have moved from the first filed date: median 0 months across 750 registrations.

Across the 242 active projects here that file sales, the median stands 30.4% sold. This is a CROSS-SECTION: many projects of different ages photographed on the same day, never the sales history of any one of them, because MahaRERA files no sales history.

Coverage: 300 of 765 registrations here file a sales table at all; statewide about a third do. The rest are outside this read entirely.

What is being built here, in the two dimensions the filings actually carry: declared project type and filed unit counts.

Unit counts are filed on 300 of 765 projects here; a scale read covers only those. See the closing section for what the filings hold no product data on at all.

The price signals the filings actually carry, each with its basis stated, and a plain statement of the one everyone asks for that they do not.

• Declared project cost over filed built-up runs at a median of Rs 38,949 per sq m across the 223 projects here filing both figures, against Rs 32,393 across Pune district. This is construction-and-land cost as declared to the regulator, never a sale price.
• Parcels here are worked at a median 2.14x (filed built-up over plot, 722 parcels; district median 1.75x).
• 7 filed figures were excluded as implausible magnitudes (a mis-filed unit, not a price) rather than averaged in.
• What no figure above is: a flat price. MahaRERA files no sale prices, no BHK mix and no carpet areas for apartments, so any per-flat rate for this locality comes from outside the filings.

515 firms operate in this pincode, holding 765 registrations between them.

The 503 smaller operators not listed hold 671 registrations between them.

Each row is the registering entity as filed. MahaRERA files no parent company, so two SPVs of one builder are two rows and nothing in the filings joins them. "Dead" counts lapsed and revoked registrations; "Regs statewide" is the same firm name across all of Maharashtra.

How concentrated this market is, and who is new to it.

• The five largest operators hold 31.2% of the filed units here (units are filed on 300 of 765 projects, so the share covers those).
• 408 of the 515 operators hold exactly one registration here; with no parent-company field in the filings, part of that is single-purpose vehicles of larger builders.
• 101 operators first registered in this pincode in 2024 or later: the entrants, against 414 incumbents.

How this locality executes: completions, extensions and the friction on the record, each against the district.

• 346 of the 765 registrations here (45.2%) have reached Completed.
• 278 of the 346 completed projects have an occupancy-certificate-shaped document on their filing, read from document titles on the register, not from the binaries.
• 205 projects have filed at least one registration extension, against 26.8% of projects across the district.
• 123 of 765 projects here carry at least one complaint (16.1%, against 14.2% district-wide); 170 disclose court cases (22.2% against 11.4%).

The professional bench certifying this locality: 510 engineers, 465 chartered accountants, 391 architects across its filings.

Names as filed, spelling variants merged; two professionals filed under one identical name would merge too, the stated cost of name-based identity where registration numbers are rarely filed.

Declared charges: secured lending on the projects here, as filed. The rate is stated over the 268 that answered, never over the catalogue.

• Of the 268 registrations here that answered the encumbrance question, 87 declare a charge, a rate of 32.5%. The other 497 registrations were never asked, so they sit outside this count entirely rather than being counted as unencumbered.
• The median declared charge is Rs 100.0 crore across the 85 projects filing a usable amount; total declared debt here is Rs 11,878.6 crore, as filed.
• 25 of the 87 charged projects declare a charge that does not appear in the CERSAI central registry on their own filing. That is common and has innocent explanations; whether it matters for a given purchase is a question for a lawyer.

Who finances this locality: Aditya Birla Capital Ltd appears on the most charged projects here (10 of 87).

A project with more than one lender is counted under each, and the declared debt column attributes the project's whole filed charge to every lender named on it, so these columns describe presence rather than a loan book.

The regulatory friction on the record here.

• 786 complaints are on record across the filings here; the heaviest is Godrej Meadows with 84.
• 374 court cases are disclosed.
• 77 matters have reached the Appellate Tribunal across 30 projects: disputes that outlived their first order.

How this report is put together, and the rules it refuses to break.

• Figures are as updated on 21 September 2026, from the MahaRERA filings of every registration whose location record files pincode 411045.
• Every comparison against "the district" means the pincode's MODAL filed district, Pune: one pincode routinely spans several filed districts through promoter mis-filing and boundary spillover, so each row's own district field is never trusted alone.
• Where a rate has a denominator smaller than the project count, the sentence says which projects it covers: unit figures cover projects filing a count, sales figures cover projects filing a sales table, and charge rates cover projects that answered the encumbrance question.

What the filings do not contain, stated so absence is never mistaken for a finding.

• No flat prices, no BHK mix, no unit configurations and no carpet areas for apartments. The one exception is plotted (NA) developments, whose plot agreements file real considerations; where this pincode has them they appear above, as aggregates only.
• No locality amenity data: distances to schools, stations or hospitals are not filed and are never invented here.
• No sales history. MahaRERA files current state only, so every demand read above is a labelled cross-section, and the only true time series is ReraGenie's own observed movement where it has enough depth to show.
• No lapse dates: a lapsed registration files only its status, and was valid until its last filed completion date.
• About two thirds of registrations statewide were never asked the encumbrance question. An unanswered filing is not an unencumbered project, and nothing above counts it as one.