🏗️ Builder comparison
Compare Two Builders
Track record, construction quality, financial strength and litigation side by side. Figures a developer has never published read 'Not disclosed' — they never win a row.
| Metric | Greenbay Infrastructure | ABA Corp WINNER |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2010 | 1997 |
| Listed / Private | Private | Private |
| Completed projects | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Delivered (M sq ft) | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| On-time delivery % | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Construction quality | 1.7/5 | 3.4/5 |
| Delivery record | 1.6/5 | 3.3/5 |
| Customer satisfaction | 1.6/5 | 3.3/5 |
| Financial strength | 1.2/5 | 3.2/5 |
| Trust | 1.6/5 | 3.5/5 |
| Litigation | YEIDA recalculated the company’s land dues at ₹441.17 Cr under the Dec 2023 stalled-projects policy. It missed instalment deadlines of 15 Jan 2025 and 15 Apr 2025, and YEIDA issued a “final” cancellation warning over ₹117.73 Cr in Jun–Jul 2025; the company paid ₹40 Cr (some reports say ₹33 Cr) and says it has paid ₹154 Cr in total. The Allahabad HC’s Lucknow bench restrained YEIDA from cancelling the allotment pending the developer’s “zero period” revision applications (reported Nov 2025). About 300 of roughly 690 plots were registered as of Jul 2025 and 30–35% of the site is still farmed. No NCLT proceedings found. No 2026 update on the dues was found. | Not disclosed |
| Expert rating | 1.8/5 | 3.5/5 |
Where a builder has not been separately assessed on a dimension, the figure shown is derived from its overall rating. It keeps the comparison like-for-like, but it is one judgement rather than five.
Overall winner
ABA Corp
Cleo County delivered a genuinely differentiated community; narrow but competent.