There has been a heated controversy around the Narmada project. Environmentalists have rightly argued for an open and informed debate. The government and the academics supporting it have felt that all the information has been shared. We do not intend to discuss the merits or demerits of various arguments concerning costs/benefits, mobilization of resources, deforestation, catchment area planning etc. Not because these are not important issues but there are some other options concerning the rights of tribals which have not been discussed in the debate so far. We have argued that Narmada can offer an opportunity to redefine the property and social relations provides the oustees are given proper share in the (a) equity of Narmada Development Corporation, (c) ownership of canal lengths, (c) electricity grids, (d) value adding enterprises etc. This share is due to them not just on humanitarian ground but also on efficiency ground. People who conserved the natural resources for so long may maintain the distribution of water and power at lesser cost than the bureaucracy notorious for its inertia. In any case the conflicts among the oustee owners of water and power and the settled plain farmers will settle at lesser cost who should get what, where and how.