Case study · Techno-Economic Viability Studies

From TEV to LIE: a slum-rehabilitation redevelopment in Jogeshwari

A public-sector bank appointed us first for the techno-economic viability study of an SRA residential redevelopment in Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai, and then as Lender's Independent Engineer for the same project through to completion.

Discuss a similar assignment

Client
A Mumbai developer's slum-rehabilitation residential project
Service
Techno-Economic Viability study, then Lender's Independent Engineer
Sector
Real estate — slum rehabilitation (SRA) residential redevelopment
Asset
Proposed residential buildings under a Slum Rehabilitation Scheme
Location
Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai
Appointed by
A public-sector bank — two branches, for appraisal and then monitoring
Period
TEV June 2023 to July 2024; LIE August 2023 to December 2025
Scale
Project cost above Rs 300 crore; term loan appraised above Rs 250 crore

01 · The assignment

What was asked

Slum Rehabilitation Scheme projects in Mumbai are financed against a particular risk profile: the rehabilitation buildings for existing occupants must be built and handed over before the sale component can be fully realised, approvals arrive in stages, and the schedule depends on consents as much as on construction.

The bank appraising the term loan asked us for a techno-economic viability study of the project. Once the loan was sanctioned, a second branch of the same bank appointed us as Lender's Independent Engineer to monitor construction and disbursement through to completion.

02 · What we did

How the work ran

01TEV: review of the approvals in hand and pending, the rehabilitation and sale components, the construction cost estimate against the approved plans, the sales assumptions against the locality's evidence, and the project cash flows under the bank's base case and stress cases.
02LIE: a baseline review of the sanctioned cost and schedule, then periodic site visits at each disbursement request to verify work done, costs incurred and the use of earlier disbursements, with a report and recommendation to the bank each time.
03Completion: a final verification when the monitored works were complete in December 2025, closing a monitoring period of a little over two years.

03 · Technical considerations

What mattered for this asset

In an SRA project, progress on the rehabilitation building is the gating item: delays there hold back the sale building's occupation certificate, so monitoring tracks both components separately.

The TEV's cost estimate becomes the LIE's yardstick. Having prepared the first, we could verify the second against the same bill of quantities rather than reconstructing it.

Fund-utilisation checks on redevelopment projects have to separate construction spend from transit-rent and consent-related payments, which are legitimate project costs but not visible as work on site.

04 · Outcome

What the record shows

The TEV report was delivered in July 2024 and the LIE mandate was completed in December 2025, both recorded in our assignment registers submitted to the bank.

The project is one of about 45 real-estate LIE mandates in our records; this one shows how the viability study and the monitoring role connect.

Client: a Mumbai developer's slum-rehabilitation residential project (not named). Dates and scope are as recorded in our assignment registers; amounts are rounded bands and lender branches are not identified.

All case studies

Who does the work