Noida, Uttar Pradesh — Sector 121
Introduction
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Project Name | Cleo County, marketed as “ABA Cleo County” (includes a luxury sub-brand, “ABA Cleo Gold”) |
| Developer | IV County Private Limited (RERA-registered promoter for all three phases); marketed under the “ABA Corp” / “ABA County Group” brand umbrella — not a single legal entity, see Builder Profile |
| Location | Sector 121, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201316 (site office: GH-05, Sector-121, Noida) |
| Project Type | Apartments (3 BHK, 4 BHK; 2 BHK also appears in one RERA phase filing) |
| RERA Number | Three separate registrations — UPRERAPRJ5931 (Phase 1), UPRERAPRJ2369 (Phase 2), UPRERAPRJ2437 (Phase 3), verified directly on up-rera.in. All three list IV County Private Limited as promoter, though one third-party aggregator names a different promoter for Phase 2 under the same number — unresolved, see Risk Assessment |
| Total Land Area | 99,820 sq. m ≈ 24.67 acres (RERA-confirmed across all three phase filings; marketed as “25 acres”) |
| Total Units / Plots | Not reconciled. Marketing consistently cites 2,638 units across 24 towers; the three RERA filings together account for roughly 1,100–1,650 units (depending on which Phase 2 figure is used) across about 10 named towers |
| Configuration | 3 BHK and 4 BHK (most sources); 2 BHK mentioned only in the Phase 3 RERA filing. Unit sizes are reported inconsistently across sources — not reconciled to one authoritative range |
| Possession | RERA-committed: Phase 1 — 31 Aug 2018; Phase 2 — 31 Aug 2020; Phase 3 — 31 Aug 2022. Marketing broadly claims “Ready to Move since Feb 2023,” but listings tied to “ABA Cleo Gold” and a Phase 2 aggregator page (same RERA numbers) show “Under Construction” with possession dates of Sept 2024 and Feb 2025 |
| Launch Price | ₹18,000 per sq. ft on Super Area (per a secondary summary of the developer’s own price-list PDF — the PDF itself could not be parsed in this research pass) |
| Payment Plan | Not disclosed. No full stage-by-stage payment plan was found from the developer or any aggregator |
| Current Status | Conflicting — widely marketed as “Ready to Move,” but at least two listings tied to the same complex and RERA numbers show “Under Construction” |
Cleo County is one of the older large-format group-housing projects in Sector 121, Noida, launched in May 2012, several years before India’s RERA Act came into force. It is built around an Egyptian/Cleopatra design theme, with a Sphinx-flanked entrance and a roughly 1,00,000 sq. ft. clubhouse called “Club Cascade” as its headline amenity. The project is registered on the UP RERA portal in three phases, all under a single promoter entity, IV County Private Limited.
Before going further, three things need to be flagged up front rather than buried later. First, the total number of units and towers cannot be reconciled: the marketed figure of 2,638 units across 24 towers is roughly double what the RERA filings for the three registered phases add up to. Second, at least one aggregator names a different promoter company for Phase 2 than the one shown on the official UP RERA record: a discrepancy on the single most important regulatory document a buyer relies on. Third, parts of the complex marketed under the same Cleo County/ABA brand are listed as “Under Construction” with 2024–2025 possession dates, even as the wider project is sold as ready and occupied. Each of these is addressed in detail below, but a buyer should know about all three before reading any further marketing material.
Key Highlights
- Project launched in May 2012, predating the RERA Act (2016); it is one of the older large-format developments in Sector 121, Noida.
- Registered in three separate phases on UP RERA: UPRERAPRJ5931 (Phase 1), UPRERAPRJ2369 (Phase 2), UPRERAPRJ2437 (Phase 3), all verified directly on up-rera.in.
- All three RERA filings list the promoter as IV County Private Limited, CIN U70102UP2012PTC093533.
- A third-party aggregator (Propulence) names a different company, Perfect Megastructure Private Limited, as the Phase 2 promoter under the same RERA number, which conflicts with the UP RERA portal record.
- Total land area is 99,820 sq. m (≈24.67 acres), consistently confirmed across all three RERA filings and matching the marketed “25 acres” figure.
- Marketing claims 2,638 units across 24 towers; RERA filings for the three registered phases sum to roughly 1,100–1,650 units across about 10 named towers; the two figures are not reconciled.
- Configurations marketed are 3 BHK and 4 BHK, with 2 BHK appearing only in the Phase 3 RERA filing.
- Unit size ranges are reported inconsistently across sources: 1,620–3,195 sq ft, 1,350–4,455 sq ft, 1,620–2,448 sq ft, and a separate 872–1,572 sq ft figure for one sub-set; no single authoritative table was found.
- A luxury sub-brand, “ABA Cleo Gold,” markets units up to 4,455 sq ft, two units per floor, described as “limited edition.”
- RERA-committed completion dates are Phase 1: 31 Aug 2018, Phase 2: 31 Aug 2020, Phase 3: 31 Aug 2022.
- Marketing widely describes the project as “Ready to Move,” with one source citing “Ready to Move since Feb 2023.”
- Listings tied to “ABA Cleo Gold” and a Propulence Phase 2 listing (same RERA numbers) show status “Under Construction” with possession dates of September 2024 and February 2025 respectively, years after the “ready” claim for the wider project.
- All three RERA phase pages display a “following details are pending for project” compliance alert as of this research date (10 Sept 2026), well past each phase’s committed completion date.
- Current asking price is approximately ₹20,900 per sq. ft (Square Yards), with a unit price band of ₹2.90 crore – ₹5.72 crore.
- 99acres resale listings show a wider price band of ₹2.57 crore – ₹8.46 crore across 3 BHK and 4 BHK units combined.
- Launch-era Base Sale Price is cited as ₹18,000 per sq. ft on Super Area (secondary-sourced; the developer’s own PDF price list could not be verified directly).
- PLC, IFMS, club membership, car parking, GST, and stamp duty/registry charges are not disclosed by the developer or any aggregator found in this research.
- A full stage-by-stage payment plan could not be located from any source.
- The headline amenity is “Club Cascade,” a clubhouse of roughly 1,00,000 sq. ft with an indoor temperature-controlled pool and a five-level cascading outdoor pool, per marketing.
- The IGBC Gold green-building certification claimed by the developer was not independently checked against IGBC’s own registry in this research.
- The RERA-registered promoter, IV County Private Limited, was incorporated on 17 December 2012, essentially concurrent with the project’s own 2012 launch, while the “ABA Corp” brand separately claims 25–30 years of group experience through a different, older entity.
- That older entity, ABA Builders Ltd (incorporated 1988), currently shows an MCA status of “Amalgamated” on Zaubacorp, yet is still marketed as the developer of a separate ABA project, Cherry County.
- No RERA complaint record naming IV County Private Limited, ABA Builders Ltd, or Cleo County was found through general web search, though this reflects a search-indexing limitation, not a confirmed absence of complaints.
- The FNG Expressway, cited in marketing as “850 metres” away, is confirmed to be under active construction and not yet fully operational.
- The developer’s separate Cherry County project (Greater Noida West) refunded ₹1.10 crore in Common Area Maintenance charges to buyers after an audit: a verifiable positive track-record signal, though for a different project and legal entity than Cleo County’s registered promoter.
Amenities
Club & Lifestyle Amenities
- “Club Cascade,” a clubhouse of approximately 1,00,000 sq. ft. (developer-marketed figure, not cross-checked against RERA-sanctioned building plans)
- Indoor temperature-controlled swimming pool with spa, gym, sauna, and jacuzzi
- Five-level cascading outdoor swimming pool, marketed as “India’s first” of its kind
- Mini-theatre, banquet halls, restaurant/café, indoor games room, and a business centre
Sports & Fitness Facilities
- Tennis and basketball courts, a skating rink, a putting golf course, and a jogging track, per various listings
Family & Community Features
- “Little Pharaoh Land,” described as a 5-acre themed children’s play area
- Themed landscaping features including a Mist Garden, Island Court, Palm Court, and an amphitheatre
- Approximately 80% green/open space, a developer-marketed figure not independently verified
Safety & Convenience
- 24×7 security with CCTV surveillance
- Power backup (capacity not disclosed in any source found)
- Rainwater harvesting, a sewage treatment plant, and solar lighting
- No EV charging provision was mentioned in any source located, a notable gap for a project marketed as luxury, though the project’s 2012-era origin predates most current EV-mandate norms
Retail & Utility
- An on-site commercial complex is described as part of the overall 24.67-acre plan; no specifics on shop count or the maintenance-service structure for retail units were found
What Is Missing: No source provides RERA-sanctioned floor-plan documentation for the clubhouse or any individually named facility: every square-footage figure quoted above (the 1,00,000 sq ft clubhouse, the 5-acre kids’ zone, the 80% green space) is a developer-marketing claim, not a figure verified against filed building plans. The IGBC Gold certification is likewise stated by marketing without an independent registry check in this research. And because parts of the wider complex (Cleo Gold, and a Phase 2 listing) are shown elsewhere as still “Under Construction,” the current completion status of shared amenities like the clubhouse and pools cannot be assumed complete for the whole project even in towers that are already occupied.
Prime Location — Cleo County
Cleo County sits in Sector 121, Noida, on what marketing describes as a “70-metre-wide straight road from the Kalindi Kunj flyover.” That places the project on the western, Delhi-border side of Noida, near the Yamuna, rather than along the Noida–Greater Noida Expressway corridor further south and east where much of Noida’s newer development activity is concentrated. No live map tool was available for this research pass, so every distance figure below is drawn from secondary aggregator sources and should be independently re-verified before relying on it.
Distance claims for the sector conflict noticeably between sources, particularly for the nearest metro station, likely because Sector 121 sits near the boundary of more than one metro corridor (the Aqua Line and the Blue Line), and different aggregators default to a different “nearest” station.
| Destination | Distance / Drive Time |
|---|---|
| Nearest metro — Sector 59, Aqua Line | 2.61 km / ~26 min walk (YoMetro) |
| Nearest metro — Sector 16 & Sector 15, Blue Line | 3.3 km / 3.6 km (NoBroker) |
| Nearest metro — Sector 71 (line unspecified) | “5 minutes” drive claim (marketing; no km given) |
| Trilokpuri–Sanjay Lake, Delhi Metro Pink Line | 4.4 km (NoBroker) |
| New Ashok Nagar Railway Station | 4.8 km (NoBroker) |
| IGI Airport, Delhi | 27 km (NoBroker) |
| Noida International Airport (Jewar) | Not verified for this specific location |
| FNG Expressway | “850 metres” (marketing claim; not independently verified, and the expressway itself is not yet fully operational — see below) |
| Sector 62 commercial/corporate hub | “10 minutes” drive claim (marketing; no km given) |
| Fortis / Max hospitals | Described only as “in the region” — no distance figure found |
| Sapphire International School, DPS Noida, Gaur International School, Lotus Valley School | “Within a 10-minute drive” (marketing claim; no km figures found) |
Major Location Advantages
- Existing, operational road connectivity via Kalindi Kunj Road, NH-24, DND Flyway, the Noida–Greater Noida Link Road, and the Delhi–Meerut Expressway.
- Sector 121’s overall micro-market rate (₹20,100/sq ft as of June 2026 per Square Yards) has shown steady quarter-on-quarter appreciation of roughly 1.4%.
- Multiple metro corridors (Aqua Line, Blue Line) pass within a few kilometres, even though the single nearest station is disputed across sources.
What the Marketing Doesn’t Tell You
The “850 metres from FNG Expressway” claim implies proximity to a corridor that does not yet function end-to-end. The FNG (Faridabad–Noida–Ghaziabad) Expressway is confirmed to be under active construction: roughly 70% complete on the Noida section, with an elevated stretch between Sector 88 and Sector 143, an underpass on the Noida–Greater Noida Expressway, and a major Yamuna river bridge connecting Noida to Faridabad all still pending. The Ghaziabad segment is targeted for 2026 completion and the Faridabad segment for 2027. A buyer weighing this project partly on FNG connectivity is pricing in an infrastructure benefit that does not exist yet and has a multi-year runway before it might.
The metro-distance figures also should not be taken at face value: they range from 2.61 km to 3.6 km depending on the source and which line is counted, and none of them were confirmed with a live map tool in this research. Similarly, hospital and school proximity claims (“in the region,” “within a 10-minute drive”) are marketing shorthand with no attached distance figures; a buyer should independently time these drives before assuming a location advantage.
Pricing & Configuration
4 BHK 4455 sqft(413.88 sqm)
| Configuration | Size (Sq. Ft) | Starting Price | All-In Estimated Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 BHK | 1,620–3,195 sq ft per Square Yards; other sources report 1,350–4,455 sq ft, 1,620–2,448 sq ft, and (for one sub-set) 872–1,572 sq ft — not reconciled to one figure | ₹2.90 crore (Square Yards asking) | Not disclosed — PLC, IFMS, GST, and stamp duty/registry are not published, so an all-in cost cannot be computed |
| 4 BHK | Up to 4,455 sq ft (“ABA Cleo Gold” sub-brand and 99acres listings) | ₹5.72 crore (Square Yards) / up to ₹8.46 crore (99acres resale) | Not disclosed |
| 2 BHK | Mentioned only in the Phase 3 RERA filing; size not specified in any source found | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
Prices themselves are inconsistent across sources. The developer’s own price-list summary cites a launch-era Base Sale Price of ₹18,000/sq ft, while a separate secondary snippet mentions a much lower figure of ₹5,850/sq ft with no year attached; the two are not reconciled, and the lower figure may reflect an early-2012 pre-launch rate. Current asking prices also vary: Square Yards shows ₹20,900/sq ft (unit band ₹2.90 crore–₹5.72 crore), 99acres resale listings show a wider band of ₹2.57 crore–₹8.46 crore, “ABA Cleo Gold” listings show an average of ₹17,500/sq ft (band ₹2.2 crore–₹7.6 crore), and a Propulence Phase 2 listing shows a band of ₹2.33 crore–₹7.49 crore.
Market benchmarking: Two independent aggregators give very different pictures of Sector 121’s going rate. Square Yards puts the sector average at ₹20,100/sq ft as of June 2026, against which Cleo County’s ₹20,900/sq ft asking price is only a modest premium, roughly in line with the premium end of the same benchmark. NoBroker, however, puts the sector-wide range at a much lower ₹4,850–₹14,700/sq ft, against which Cleo County would represent a premium of 42% to well over 300%. This gap is too wide to average away; it most likely reflects NoBroker blending in older or non-premium stock across the whole sector rather than comparable high-rise projects. A buyer should not accept a single clean “% premium over the market” claim from either the developer or a broker without asking which benchmark it is based on.
Price Includes
- Not disclosed. No source located in this research (developer or aggregator) itemizes what the Base Sale Price does or does not cover beyond the unit itself.
Additional Charges
- PLC (Park/Corner/Floor facing): Not disclosed
- Club membership: Not disclosed
- Car parking: Not disclosed
- IFMS / maintenance deposit: Not disclosed
- GST: Not disclosed
- Registry and stamp duty: Not disclosed
None of these figures appear in the developer’s marketing material, the price-list PDF (which could not be parsed with the tools available), or any aggregator source found. This is a genuine information gap rather than an oversight in this research; a buyer should treat any verbal quote for these charges as unverified until it is in writing.
Payment Plan
| Stage | Percentage |
|---|---|
| — | Not disclosed — no full stage-by-stage payment plan (booking percentage, construction-linked milestones, etc.) was found from the developer or any aggregator in this research pass |
Builder Profile
| Particulars | Details |
|---|---|
| Legal Entity Name | IV County Private Limited (RERA-registered promoter for all three Cleo County phases) |
| CIN / Registration Number | U70102UP2012PTC093533 |
| Incorporation Date | 17 December 2012 — flag: essentially concurrent with the project’s own May 2012 launch |
| Registered Office | 114, 1st Floor, GH-05, Sector-121 Cleo Street, Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 201301 |
| Founder / MD | Not disclosed as a single designation; directors on record are Gopal Bohra, Shanker Lal Gupta, Shradha Ramsisaria, Puspahas Agrawal, Sunil Totlani, Binoy Das, and Avnish Agrawal |
| Claimed Experience | “25 years” per one aggregator, “30 years” per another — inconsistent even across the developer’s own marketing/aggregator profiles |
| Delivered Projects | 15–16 projects listed as “Ready” on a developer-hosted aggregator page — claimed, not independently verified against RERA-filed completion status for each |
| Clients Served | Not disclosed |
| Other Entities | ABA Builders Ltd (CIN U70101WB1988PLC045438, incorporated 1988, Kolkata — MCA status shown as “Amalgamated” yet still marketed as developer of ABA Cherry County); Perfect Megastructure Private Limited (CIN U45200DL2010PTC208279 — named by one aggregator as the Phase 2 promoter under the same RERA number UP RERA attributes to IV County Pvt Ltd) |
The entity that actually holds RERA registration for Cleo County, IV County Private Limited, is a project-specific company incorporated in December 2012, the same year the project itself was launched, and registered at the project site address itself. That is consistent with it being a special-purpose vehicle set up for this one development, not the group’s main operating company. The “ABA Corp” brand’s own claim of 25–30 years of experience rests on a much older company, ABA Builders Ltd, incorporated in 1988. But ABA Builders Ltd’s current MCA-listed status is “Amalgamated,” meaning it has been merged into another entity, even though it is still marketed on at least one aggregator as the current developer of a separate ABA project, Cherry County. A third company, Perfect Megastructure Private Limited, shares a director (Puspahas Agrawal) with IV County Private Limited and is named by one aggregator as the actual Phase 2 promoter, conflicting with the UP RERA portal’s own listing.
Taken together, “ABA Corp” operates through at least three distinct legal entities identified in this research, and it is not possible from public sources to say with certainty which single entity would ultimately be a party to a Cleo County buyer’s sale agreement. On the positive side, there is at least one verifiable, favourable track-record data point for the broader group: at its separate Cherry County project in Greater Noida West, the developer refunded ₹1.10 crore in Common Area Maintenance charges to buyers after an audit found lower actual expenses during the Covid period. No RERA complaint record naming IV County Private Limited, ABA Builders Ltd, or Cleo County was found through general web search, though this reflects a search-indexing limitation rather than a confirmed clean record; the UP RERA portal’s own complaint-search module was not directly queried in this research.
Risk Assessment — Positive Factors
- All three phases of Cleo County carry verifiable RERA registrations (UPRERAPRJ5931, UPRERAPRJ2369, UPRERAPRJ2437), confirmed directly on the UP RERA portal rather than taken from developer marketing.
- Total land area of 99,820 sq. m (≈24.67 acres) is consistently confirmed across all three RERA filings and matches the marketed acreage, one of the more reliably corroborated facts in this research.
- The project’s marketed possession status broadly tracks its RERA-committed completion dates (2018, 2020, 2022) with some lag, which is a genuinely positive signal relative to many newer Noida projects, where possession slippage is often measured in years, not months.
- Sector 121’s own micro-market rate (per Square Yards) has shown steady, if modest, quarter-on-quarter price appreciation (~1.4%) as of June 2026.
- The developer group has a verifiable positive track record at a separate project (Cherry County), where ₹1.10 crore in CAM charges was refunded to buyers following an expense audit.
- The project benefits from already-operational road infrastructure (Kalindi Kunj Road, NH-24, DND Flyway, Noida–Greater Noida Link Road, Delhi–Meerut Expressway), rather than depending solely on infrastructure still under construction.
Risk Assessment — Limitations
- Regulatory: All three RERA phase pages display a “following details are pending for project” compliance alert, present on the portal as of this research date (10 Sept 2026), years after each phase’s own committed completion date.
- Regulatory: A third-party aggregator names a different promoter (Perfect Megastructure Private Limited) for Phase 2 than the one shown on the official UP RERA record (IV County Private Limited) under the identical RERA number, UPRERAPRJ2369: an unresolved conflict on the single most load-bearing regulatory document for a buyer.
- Regulatory: Only about 10 towers across three phases are traceable to a RERA registration; marketing claims 24 towers total for the complex, and the additional towers’ regulatory status could not be confirmed in this research.
- Pricing: Launch-era pricing itself is inconsistent: ₹18,000/sq ft per one secondary source versus ₹5,850/sq ft per another, with no reconciling detail on dates.
- Pricing: No additional charges (PLC, club membership, car parking, IFMS, GST, stamp duty, registry) are disclosed anywhere found, making it impossible to calculate a true all-in cost before booking.
- Pricing: Locality benchmark figures diverge sharply between aggregators (₹20,100/sq ft per Square Yards versus ₹4,850–14,700/sq ft per NoBroker for the same sector), which makes any single “fair premium” claim unreliable without specifying the source.
- Developer: The RERA-registered promoter entity, IV County Private Limited, was incorporated in December 2012, essentially concurrent with the project’s 2012 launch, a much shorter track record than the “25–30 years” experience claimed under the wider “ABA Corp” brand.
- Developer: “ABA Corp” operates through at least three distinct legal entities (IV County Private Limited, ABA Builders Ltd, Perfect Megastructure Private Limited) identified in this research, complicating a clear picture of legal accountability.
- Developer: ABA Builders Ltd, the entity underpinning the brand’s older-experience claim, shows an MCA status of “Amalgamated” yet is still marketed as the current developer of a separate ABA project (Cherry County), a status conflict not resolved from public sources.
- Location maturity: The nearest-metro claim varies by more than a kilometre depending on the source, suggesting the sector sits at the edge of competing service areas rather than being clearly well-served by one line.
- Liquidity/exit: The unreconciled size and pricing ranges across sources (four different size bands, and a resale price band spanning ₹2.57 crore to ₹8.46 crore) make it difficult for a prospective buyer to benchmark a fair resale value with confidence.
- Possession timeline: Listings tied to “ABA Cleo Gold” and a Phase 2 aggregator page (same RERA numbers as the wider project) show status “Under Construction” with possession dates of September 2024 and February 2025, well after the “Ready to Move since Feb 2023” claim made for the broader project.
- Infrastructure dependency: The FNG Expressway, cited in marketing as 850 metres away, remains under active construction, with major components (a Yamuna bridge, an elevated stretch, an underpass) still incomplete and a targeted completion window of 2026–2027; any locational premium based on FNG proximity assumes a corridor that does not yet function end-to-end.
The Hidden Information Between the Lines
The most consequential fact buried under Cleo County’s marketing is not any single number but the fact that no single number can be trusted without cross-checking. The unit count is the clearest example: the project is marketed everywhere as 2,638 units across 24 towers, but the three RERA filings, the only regulatory record that actually exists for this project, together account for roughly 1,100 to 1,650 units across about 10 named towers, depending on which Phase 2 figure is used. That is not a rounding difference; it is a gap of a thousand or more units. One plausible explanation is that additional towers were built and sold before the RERA Act took effect in 2016, since the project itself launched in 2012 and therefore was never obligated to register those towers. But that is a guess, not a verified fact, and a buyer has no way from public sources to know which of the 24 marketed towers actually carry any RERA registration at all.
A second, more pointed problem sits inside the RERA record itself. UP RERA’s own portal names IV County Private Limited as the Phase 2 promoter, but a third-party aggregator citing the identical RERA number names a different company, Perfect Megastructure Private Limited. The two companies share a director, which suggests they belong to the same promoter family rather than being unrelated, but that does not resolve the question of which entity is legally the promoter of record, and therefore which entity a buyer’s rights under RERA actually run against. This is exactly the kind of discrepancy a buyer cannot resolve from a brochure; it requires a direct, dated screenshot of the live UP RERA record before signing anything.
A third finding concerns the gap between the brand’s claimed pedigree and the entity that actually stands behind this specific project. “ABA Corp” markets 25 to 30 years of experience, but the company that is RERA-registered for Cleo County, IV County Private Limited, was incorporated in December 2012, the same year the project launched. The older entity that the “25–30 years” claim likely traces back to, ABA Builders Ltd (incorporated 1988), is listed in current MCA records as “Amalgamated,” meaning it has already been merged into something else, yet it continues to be marketed on at least one platform as the active developer of a separate ABA project. A buyer relying on “decades of experience” as a reason to trust this project is, in practice, relying on a company that no longer exists in its original form, standing behind a much younger project-specific entity.
A fourth, quieter issue is the total absence of any published cost breakdown beyond the headline per-square-foot rate. No PLC, IFMS, club membership, parking, GST, or stamp duty figure appears in any source located in this research: not the developer’s own materials, not any aggregator, not even the price-list PDF that exists but could not be read with the tools available. A buyer quoting a “starting price” from a broker or channel partner right now is, by definition, quoting an incomplete number, since the additional charges that typically add 10–20% or more to a unit’s true cost are simply not on the record anywhere.
Finally, the coexistence of “Ready to Move since Feb 2023” marketing for the flagship brand alongside “Under Construction” listings for the Cleo Gold sub-brand and a Phase 2 aggregator page (both tied to the exact same RERA numbers as the wider project, with possession dates in 2024 and 2025) suggests that “Cleo County” is being sold to the market as a single, finished, occupied community when parts of it, by RERA’s own timeline references, are not. This is not necessarily deceptive; it may simply reflect that a large multi-phase project delivers unevenly. But it means a buyer cannot treat “the project is ready” as a fact about any specific unit they are being shown, only about some part of the complex, and possibly not the part being sold to them.
Questions to Consider Before Investing
- Can you show me today’s live UP RERA portal record confirming that IV County Private Limited (not Perfect Megastructure Private Limited) is the registered promoter for Phase 2, RERA number UPRERAPRJ2369?
- Which specific legal entity’s name will appear on my Agreement to Sell and Sale Deed: IV County Private Limited, or a different group entity?
- Only about 10 towers are traceable to a RERA registration across the three phases; can you provide the RERA numbers for the remaining towers within the marketed “24 towers”?
- Can you reconcile the marketed 2,638 total units against the RERA-filed phase-wise counts, and confirm exactly how many total units exist in the specific tower I am considering?
- Is the specific unit and tower I am being shown covered by a completion or occupancy certificate today, or does it fall under a listing (such as “ABA Cleo Gold” or the aggregator-listed Phase 2) that currently shows “Under Construction” status?
- What specifically does the “following details are pending for project” flag on the RERA portal refer to for this project, and when is it expected to be resolved?
- Can you provide an itemized cost sheet covering PLC, club membership, car parking, IFMS, GST, and stamp duty/registry, none of which are published in any material I have seen?
- What is the exact sq. ft area and RERA-sanctioned building-plan reference for “Club Cascade” and the other named shared amenities?
- Can you share the full, stage-wise payment plan as filed with RERA, rather than a marketing summary?
- Since IV County Private Limited was incorporated in December 2012, essentially at the same time the project launched, how does the “25 to 30 years of experience” claim map to this specific legal entity’s actual track record?
- Has any complaint been filed against IV County Private Limited, ABA Builders Ltd, or Perfect Megastructure Private Limited on the UP RERA portal, and can I see that search result directly rather than a verbal assurance?
- What is the current, verifiable construction status of the FNG Expressway link cited in your marketing, and is the “850 metres from FNG Expressway” claim referring to a road that is operational today?
Who Should Consider This Project
- End-users who want a large, established, landscaped gated community in a broadly built-out part of Noida, and who are willing to independently verify, tower by tower, which unit carries a clean, currently valid RERA registration before booking.
- Buyers specifically targeting resale or ready units in the towers explicitly named in the RERA filings (D1, D2, C1, C / A-3, A-4, A / E1, E2, E3), who obtain a completion or occupancy certificate for that exact unit before making any payment.
- Long-horizon buyers who are comfortable treating eventual FNG Expressway completion (targeted 2026–2027) as a possible future upside rather than pricing it into today’s decision.
- Investors with the resources and patience to commission independent legal due diligence (a title search, an MCA21 pull on the entity actually signing the agreement, and a direct RERA complaint-history search), given the entity fragmentation identified in this research.
- Buyers who value the project’s confirmed 24.67-acre scale and established position in the sector, and are not basing their decision primarily on the unverified 2,638-unit/24-tower marketing narrative.
Who Should Not Consider This Project
- Bank-loan-dependent buyers who need unambiguous, single-entity title continuity: the multi-SPV promoter structure (IV County Private Limited, ABA Builders Ltd, Perfect Megastructure Private Limited) could complicate a lender’s due diligence and should be clarified before applying for financing.
- Short-term investors or flippers whose thesis depends on near-term appreciation from the FNG Expressway or other infrastructure that is not yet operational.
- Buyers who would take “Ready to Move” marketing at face value without confirming, unit by unit, whether their specific tower falls under a listing that currently shows “Under Construction” status.
- Buyers who need a fully itemized, contractually binding cost sheet before deciding, since PLC, IFMS, GST, parking, and stamp duty/registry figures are not disclosed anywhere found in this research.
- Risk-averse first-time buyers who would be uncomfortable proceeding while an unresolved “following details are pending” compliance flag sits on the project’s RERA record years after its committed completion dates.
Honest Verdict
Cleo County has real things going for it that should not be dismissed. It sits on a confirmed 24.67-acre plot, it carries actual RERA registrations traceable to a named promoter entity rather than being unregistered, and its marketed possession timeline broadly tracks its RERA-committed dates with only modest lag, a genuinely better record than many newer Noida projects show. The developer group also has at least one independently verifiable positive data point, the CAM-charge refund at its Cherry County project, which suggests some willingness to be held accountable on cost transparency, at least at that project.
The core problem is that almost every number a buyer would need to make a confident decision either does not reconcile across sources or is not disclosed at all. The total unit count is off by roughly a thousand units between marketing and RERA filings. The Phase 2 promoter’s identity is disputed between the official RERA portal and a third-party aggregator citing the same registration number. Parts of the complex are shown as still under construction while the project as a whole is marketed as ready. And basic cost components (PLC, IFMS, GST, parking, stamp duty) are absent from every source located in this research. None of these gaps individually proves wrongdoing, but together they mean a buyer cannot currently get a clean, internally consistent picture of what they would actually be purchasing, from whom, and for how much.
The practical response is not to walk away reflexively but to insist on paper before money changes hands: a same-day printout or screenshot of the live UP RERA record for the exact phase and tower being sold, written confirmation of which legal entity signs the agreement, a completion or occupancy certificate for that specific unit if it is being sold as ready, and an itemized cost sheet covering every charge beyond the base rate. None of this is unusual or unreasonable to ask of a project of this scale; the fact that so much of it is currently unavailable through ordinary research is itself the finding.
If the promoter identity conflict on Phase 2 were resolved with a direct portal confirmation, if the unit-count and size-range discrepancies were reconciled to one authoritative table, and if a full cost sheet and payment plan were published, this would look like a considerably safer, more mature project than the current information gaps suggest. Until then, the honest summary is this: Cleo County is a large, physically real, partially delivered project with a confirmed land parcel and a traceable promoter, wrapped in marketing claims that its own regulatory filings do not fully support. Verify every number yourself before you sign anything.
Disclaimer: This analysis is based on publicly available information gathered through independent research as of 10 September 2026. No financial advice is implied. Always consult a RERA-registered real estate agent and an independent property lawyer before making any real estate investment.
