Asian Fab Kengeri Price

There is no price for this project. Not a base rate, not a ticket size, not a per-square-foot figure, not a payment schedule. Asian Fab Tec Limited has published nothing, and no document we could obtain carries a number that could reasonably be called this scheme's price.

That is the whole of the answer, and we would rather give it in the first paragraph than bury it under a page of substitutes. Anyone quoting you a rate for this development today is quoting you something they made up or something they were given by a channel that made it up.

Asian Fab Kengeri is the working title used on this site; Asian Fab Tec Limited has not announced a marketing name for the development.

What we can give you is the surrounding market, taken only from sources that publish their own numbers under their own name. These are not this project's price. They are the price level of the belt the project sits in, and they are useful for one thing: recognising a quote that is out of line when you eventually receive one.

Not all of these figures carry the same weight, and it matters which is which. A developer's own published rate for a specific, named, launched product is evidence of what someone is actually asking. A micro-market average is a research house's mean across a wide belt of very different buildings. The first is a price; the second is a temperature reading. We have set them out in that order deliberately.

Tier one: a named developer's own published rate

Casagrand Moondance is a launched, priced apartment product in Kumbalgodu, on the same Mysore Road corridor, by a different developer. Casagrand publishes its figures on its own page, which makes them the strongest single price signal available near this site.

Both rates have to be quoted together. The Rs 5,799 figure is a promotional rate the developer brands as its own discount against the Rs 7,499 it lists as the market price. Presenting the lower number alone, as a good deal of circulating material does, converts a marketing discount into a market rate.

INFERRED, arithmetic shown. Casagrand's own published 3 BHK range is a check on both. Rs 1.18 crore over 1,650 sq ft works out to roughly Rs 7,150 per sq ft; Rs 1.31 crore over 1,864 sq ft works out to roughly Rs 7,030 per sq ft. That assumes the lowest quoted price belongs to the smallest area and the highest to the largest, which the published material does not confirm. On that reading, the tickets actually being advertised sit far closer to the undiscounted Rs 7,499 than to the promoted Rs 5,799. Treat this as an estimate of what the published range implies, not as a rate Casagrand has quoted.

Tier two: a micro-market average

A micro-market average is an average. It blends completed and under-construction stock, small buildings and large ones, resale and primary, and it says nothing about where within the belt a given scheme should sit. Read as a level and a direction, it is genuinely informative. Read as a rate for one unbuilt project, it is not.

The gap to the city figure is worth noticing. At Rs 8,040 against Rs 9,450, Mysore Road prints Rs 1,410 per sq ft below the Bengaluru average, about 14.9% below (INFERRED: Rs 9,450 less Rs 8,040 is Rs 1,410; Rs 1,410 over Rs 9,450 is 14.9%). That discount is the corridor's basic proposition, and it is the reason a Purple Line terminus at Challaghatta, 2.76 km from the site by road, and Kengeri railway station at 3.67 km by road, matter as much as they do here.

The Mysore Road and Electronic City trend

Mysore Road has printed above Electronic City in all three quarters on record, and in Q2 2026 it stood 7.9% higher. But the premium narrowed, from 9.3% to 7.9%. The finding in that pair of numbers is that Electronic City is closing on Mysore Road, not that Mysore Road is pulling away. Material that presents this corridor as newly overtaking Electronic City has the direction backwards.

The operative Terms of Reference, granted 8 July 2026 under proposal SIA/KA/INFRA2/579724/2026, records a project cost of Rs 526.27 crore and a built-up area of 287,985.28 sq m, which is 3.10 million sq ft, on 6.2624 hectares — 15.47 acres. Those are verified figures from a signed certificate, and they are the only cost figures attached to this project anywhere.

It is tempting to divide one by the other and call the result a construction cost per square foot, then read a price off it. We are not going to, and you should not either. Three reasons:

• It is a declared cost, submitted for environmental appraisal. It is not an audited construction budget and it is not a sales-cost model.
• The certificate does not state what the figure includes. Whether it carries land, financing, statutory approvals or marketing is not recorded, and we do not know.
• The earlier filing on the same parcel points the other way. Proposal SIA/KA/INFRA2/569887/2026, whose Standard Terms of Reference were granted 9 March 2026 and which the July grant supersedes, declared 273,029.69 sq m of built-up area at Rs 562.67 crore. Between the two filings the built-up area rose by 14,955.59 sq m, about 5.5%, while the declared cost fell by Rs 36.40 crore, about 6.5%. Both are real, both are filed, and neither is wrong. But a quantity that moves in the opposite direction to the area it supposedly covers is not a per-square-foot cost basis, and treating it as one would be arithmetic dressed up as a finding.

One further piece of arithmetic, offered only so you can see why gross figures do not convert into prices. INFERRED: 287,985.28 sq m is 3.10 million sq ft of built-up area. Set against the client brief's 1,336 apartments, that is roughly 2,320 sq ft gross per unit. Gross built-up area includes basements, parking decks, circulation cores, wall thicknesses and the clubhouse, and is always substantially larger than any saleable-area figure. This tells you nothing about apartment sizes and nothing about whether the brief's unit count is right. It is set out here so that nobody mistakes 2,320 sq ft for a home.

What follows is public law rather than a project price, and it applies to any residential purchase in Karnataka. None of it is specific to Asian Fab Kengeri and none of it can be, because there is nothing to apply it to yet.

A quoted rate is never what you pay. On top of the consideration set out in the instrument sit statutory charges, and they fall under distinct heads with distinct bases:

• Stamp duty is charged on the higher of the consideration recorded in the instrument or the guidance value notified for the property, and it is levied in slabs that depend on the value of the property. Guidance values are notified against survey numbers, and this parcel's are on the filed record: Sy No. 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/6, 7/1A and 7/1B, Doddabele Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. Anyone can look those up directly.
• Registration fee is charged on the same base as stamp duty and is payable at the sub-registrar's office at the time of registration.
• Cess and surcharge are levied along with stamp duty and are collected on the same instrument.
• Goods and Services Tax applies to the sale of an under-construction unit. Where the whole of the consideration is received after the competent authority has issued the completion certificate, the transaction falls outside GST. The applicable rate depends on the band the unit falls into and on the scheme the promoter has opted into.

We do not publish the rates for any of these heads. They are set by the state, revised in budgets, and would be stale on this page within a year of your reading it. Take them from the Karnataka Department of Stamps and Registration on the day, and take the GST position from your own tax adviser.

A worked example that is not this project's price

Take a round agreement value of Rs 1 crore. This number was chosen because it makes the arithmetic legible. It is not Asian Fab Kengeri's price, it is not an estimate of Asian Fab Kengeri's price, and no unit in this project has a price.

On a Rs 1 crore instrument, every single percentage point of every statutory head costs Rs 1 lakh.

Confirm each rate, add the percentage points, and multiply. That is the whole method, and it survives every rate revision. What it makes visible is that the statutory stack is not a rounding error on a home purchase — it is a material addition to the number in the brochure, and it is payable in cash at registration rather than financed alongside the unit.

This scheme holds no registration with the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority. There is no registration number, and there is no application pending — we checked the registry and found neither. Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 is plain about what that means: a project in a registrable class may not be advertised, marketed, booked, sold or offered for sale until registration has been granted. A price quoted before that point is not an early-bird rate. It is a quote for something that cannot lawfully be sold on the day it is made.

Nor is this scheme environmentally cleared. Standard Terms of Reference were granted on 8 July 2026, which is permission to conduct the environmental impact study and to define what that study must examine. The certificate states in terms that a Terms of Reference grant does not amount to approval, consent or permission. A separate Environmental Clearance application, filed 21 April 2026, remains referred to SEIAA and undecided.

This microsite is an information and enquiry resource for a scheme at the approvals stage. It is not a booking channel, and it carries no price because there is none to carry.