Sector 89, Gurugram
We do not pick one. Below is what each states about itself, what we could check against a public record, and, named rather than left blank, what neither of us can answer.


What each one costs
Every figure below is published by the project or computed the same way its own page computes it. Nothing is averaged, and a disagreement between sources renders as a range.
| Orris Woodview Residences | Tulip Ace | |
|---|---|---|
| Asking rate | ₹20,179 per super sq ft ≈ ₹31,044 per carpet one listing | ₹9,826 per super sq ft ≈ ₹15,117 per carpet one listing |
| Both quoted on the same area basis — that is one of the reasons these two are on a page together. | ||
| All-in, per carpet sq ft | ₹39,501a modelled rate card | ₹21,503a modelled rate card |
| The quoted rate plus development charges, GST, stamp duty and registration, divided back over carpet area. Same calculation as each project’s own page — statutory rates are published, development charges are marked where we had to model them. | ||
| Ticket, as published | ₹2.20 Cr – ₹12.17 Cr | ₹2.00 Cr – ₹3.50 Cr |
| These overlap. That is the test that put the two on one page: a budget that reaches one reaches the other. | ||
| A 4 BHK here | ₹6.08 Cr – ₹8.80 Cr 3,013–4,362 sq ft super ≈ 1,958–2,835 sq ft carpet | ₹2.80 Cr – ₹3.30 Cr 3,030 sq ft super ≈ 1,970 sq ft carpet |
| The configuration both projects list most of, priced as each publishes it. Nothing is converted or estimated by us. | ||
| Against comparable homes | ₹3,174 above the median of 104 comparable homes our cohort | Level with it within ₹500 of the median of 89 comparable homes our cohort |
| Not against each other — against every home we hold on the same area basis, price tier and lifecycle. | ||
What the public record holds
| Orris Woodview Residences | Tulip Ace | |
|---|---|---|
| Registration | RERA-GRG-640-2020hrera register | No match found may be registered under a different legal name no match found |
| A registration we cannot confidently attach is a limit of our matching and says nothing about the project. We say which it is. | ||
| Registered until | 15/07/2023flagged lapsed | not on record |
| Stage and possession | Ready To Move possession stated as 2017-12 as listed | Ready To Move possession stated as 2014-09 as listed |
| What the developer told the regulator | 0% of 576 units booked filed 2020-06-16 form rep-i | not on record |
| Form REP-I is the developer’s own declaration to Haryana RERA. Where only one of the two has filed, that asymmetry is the finding. It is no mark against the other. | ||
The building and the developer
| Orris Woodview Residences | Tulip Ace | |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Lotus Greens and Orris Infrastructure 1 projects we track our corpus | Tulip Infratech 13 projects we track, 7 town-planning licences, 5 refused applications tcp rolls |
| Size | not on record | not on record |
| Amenities | 50 counted 41 of them premium as listed | 38 counted 30 of them premium as listed |
| A count of what is listed. It says nothing about what any of it is worth. | ||
| Nearest metro | 13.1 kmstraight-line | 13.2 kmstraight-line |
| Resale outlook | Slower to resell how contested selling it again would be our index | Mixed resale market how contested selling it again would be our index |
| Our own index, filed nowhere: built from liquidity, pipeline, price position and location, and validated against resale listings. | ||
The short version
Each line names the figure it came from. None of them is advice.
Not compared
These fields are missing for one or both projects, so no comparison is drawn. Named here rather than left blank, where an absence would read as a finding.
On Orris Woodview Residences
On Tulip Ace
The part you were expecting
Keep going


Other comparisons with these two