CapitaLand’s Hyderabad site is at Madhapur, inside the HITEC City belt, at 27 MW of IT capacity behind 42 MW of gross power — a ratio of 1.56, the most power headroom of any CapitaLand Indian asset. The 31 December 2025 fund filing records it as under development with power secured. No commissioning update has been published since. It is 7.9% of Telangana’s 341.3 MW counted capacity, 4.9 times Iron Mountain’s operating HYD-1 in the same city, and one ninth of AirTrunk’s 243 MW claim at Chandanvelly. In a market where three gigawatts have been announced, 27 MW with a secured power connection is worth more than most of them.
1At a glance
2Madhapur is not Chandanvelly
| Location | Records | Capacity | Character |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madhapur | CapitaLand 27 MW IT | 27 MW | HITEC City, built up, urban, mid-size |
| Kondapur | Iron Mountain HYD-1 5.5 MW | 5.5 MW | Operating colocation, central |
| Chandanvelly | CtrlS 700 MW claimed + AirTrunk 243 MW | 943 MW | Greenfield mega-site, western fringe |
| Telangana counted total | All additive rows | 341.3 MW | — |
943 MW published in one village against 341.3 MW counted across the state. That is the same three-to-one ratio this registry found in Navi Mumbai, and it has the same cause: claimed scalable capacity being read as capacity.
CapitaLand’s Madhapur site is on the other side of the city and in a different business. It is a 27 MW urban build with secured power, not a 700 MW greenfield claim. For a tenant who needs Hyderabad capacity in 2027 rather than 2032, that distinction is the whole decision.
Add CtrlS’s 700 MW and AirTrunk’s 243 MW claims in Chandanvelly and you get 943 MW — nearly three times everything Telangana has actually built.
Neither figure is dishonest. CtrlS says it can scale to 700 MW; AirTrunk says at least 243 MW at full build. Both are statements about a site, not a building.
But a market that reads them as capacity will over-price Hyderabad by a factor of three. That is the gap this registry exists to price.
3The most headroom in the family
| Asset | Gross MW | IT MW | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mumbai Tower 1 | 50 | 34 | 1.47 |
| Mumbai Tower 2 | 55 | 37 | 1.49 |
| Chennai 01 | 53 | 34 | 1.56 |
| Hyderabad, Madhapur | 42 | 27 | 1.56 — tied highest |
| Platform | 200 | 132 | 1.52 |
1.56 is high, and on a building that does not exist yet it is a design choice rather than a measurement. Fifteen megawatts of gross power are being built for every 27 MW of IT sold — about 56% overhead against a Mumbai tower’s 47%.
Two readings, both defensible. Either the design carries real headroom for liquid cooling and high-density AI racks, which is what the Chennai release explicitly describes, or the gross figure includes substation capacity that is not all this building’s. The filing does not say which.
What it does mean practically: 42 MW of secured power in Madhapur is a distribution connection that has been arranged in one of the most constrained parts of Hyderabad. That is the scarce asset here, not the 27 MW.
4What has not happened since December
- CIDCF filing records CapitaLand DC Hyderabad at Madhapur as under development at 27 MW IT and 42 MW gross power, with power secured. CIDCF acquires a 20.2% interest.
- CapitaLand Investment releases on the Chennai development and reaffirms its India commitment. Hyderabad is not updated.
- Ten months on from the filing, no commissioning statement, no phase schedule and no tenant has been published for Madhapur.
The silence is the finding. Across this registry, a project with secured power and no update for ten months falls into a specific category: funded, permitted, and stalled or being held. That is not the same as abandoned, and it is not the same as building.
Compare the neighbours. Iron Mountain’s HYD-1 in Kondapur has been operating since May 2023. AirTrunk’s Chandanvelly site has a 243 MW claim and no verified stage either. CapitaLand’s 27 MW is the only Hyderabad record in this file with power secured stated in a filing.
At the 1.56 ratio, when it runs, Madhapur will draw 42 MW. A connection that size in Madhapur has an energisation agreement with a date attached to it. That agreement is the document to ask for.
5Procurement
6Limits and open questions
- Under development as of 31 December 2025 and nothing later. The registry does not infer a stage.
- “Power secured” is the filing’s phrase and is not the same as energised. No voltage, capacity or connection date is published.
- 27 MW is IT capacity and is what is counted; the 42 MW gross figure never enters a national total.
- The 1.56 ratio may include shared or future substation capacity and is therefore an upper bound on this building’s overhead.
- No floor area and no site area are published, so no density or land-efficiency figure exists.
- Telangana’s 341.3 MW excludes the CtrlS and AirTrunk Chandanvelly claims, which are scalability and unverified stage respectively.
- What would close it. A phase schedule, or the connection date behind the secured power.
7Sources
Sources: the CapitaLand India Data Centre Fund release of 31 December 2025; the CapitaLand Investment release of 15 October 2026; CapitaLand data centre listing pages; and CLINT results disclosures.