Preview
FILED
3/28/2022 3:15 PM
FELICIA PITRE
2 CITS'ESERVE DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Christi Underwood DEPUTY
DC-22-03390
CAUSE NO.
SRINIVAS SARANU and § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
LALITHA DOPPALAPUDI § 1 62n d
Plaintzffi, §
§
v. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
GIRI SARANU and §
VALUE GROWTH CO. LLC §
Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COME NOW Plaintiffs, Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha Doppalapudi (collectively
“Plaintiffs”), and file this Original Petition against Defendants, Giri Saranu and VALUE
GROWTH CO. LLC (collectively “Defendants”), and will show the Court as follows:
A. DISCOVERY-CONTROL PLAN
l. Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery under Level 2 of the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure 190.3.
2. Plaintiffs seeks monetary relief of over $200,000.00, but less than $1,000,000.00, and
non-monetary relief, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment
interest, and attorney fees.
B. PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Srinivas Saranu (“Srinivas”), an individual, has appeared herein by and through
his counsel of record, Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC, 515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E, Ste. 250,
Houston, Texas 77060.
4. Plaintiff Lalitha Doppalapudi (“Lalitha”), an individual, has appeared herein by and
through her counsel of record, Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC, 515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E,
Ste. 250, Houston, Texas 77060.
5. Defendant Giri Saranu (“Giri”), an individual, may be served at 1333 Corporate Dr., Ste.
270, Irving, Texas 75038 or Wherever he may be found.
6. Defendant VALUE GROWTH CO. LLC C‘VGC”) is a domestic corporation lawfully
formed and operating Within the State of Texas, and can be served through its registered agent,
Nagarajitha Bandaru, at 1333 Corporate Dr., Ste. 270, Irving, Texas 75038.
C. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter because the amount in controversy is Within
the jurisdictional limits of the Court.
8. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies
Code §15.002 in that all or substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to these claims
occurred in Dallas County, Texas.
D. FACTS
9. Plaintiffs are bringing this lawsuit against Defendants as a result of Defendants’ gross
mismanagement of funds and lack of disclosures resulting in fraudulent activities relating to
newly-formed companies that involved Plaintiffs.
10. In or around June 2021, Defendant Giri Saranu entered into an agreement with Plaintiffs
Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha Doppalapudi wherein Plaintiffs agreed to serve as Managers of VGC
HEATH LLC, VGC GUNTER LLC, and VGC CELINA LLC (the “Companies”) by executing
Operating Agreements (the “Agreements”) for each respective company.
11. The Agreements provided that Plaintiffs would be responsible for overseeing and keeping
the Companies’ financial books and records of accounts, operations, and additionally,
implementing and maintaining internal controls to ensure compliance with any applicable laws.
12. The terms of the Agreements also granted Managers, and Members of the Companies the
authorization to review and inspect the Companies’ documents and other information for any
reasonable purpose related to their interest in the Companies including any documents and
information required by law to be disclosed.
l3. Between the months of June 2021 and July 2021, Defendants purchased three properties
using funds collected from investors in name of the Companies managed by Plaintiffs, without
their proper consent and/or authorization.
VGC HEATH LLC
14. On or about June 11, 2021, using the funds collected from investors in the name of VGC
HEATH LLC, Defendants purchased the real property located at 0 N FM Road 740, Fomey,
Texas 75126 consisting of 8.19 acres land for $425,872.95. Defendant Giri did not disclose or
provide to Plaintiffs any type of invoice or approval document commonly required to be
reviewed for a property transaction involved with VGC HEATH LLC.
15. Defendant Giri electronically forged Plaintiffs signatures on the property’s closing
documents. Plaintiffs never gave Defendants oral or written consent to sign on their behalf in
order to close on this property.
16. Further, Plaintiffs discovered there is a remaining amount of $189,127.05 that is entirely
unaccounted for from the initial $615,000.00 collected from investors in the name of VGC
HEATH LLC.
VGC GUNTER LLC
17. On or about July 16, 2021, again using the funds collected from investors in the name of
VGC GUNTER LLC, Defendant Giri Saranu purchased the real property located at 669 Massey
Rd., Gunter Texas 75058 (“Gunter Property”) for $1,594,248.05.
18. Not only was the purchase of this property unauthorized and not disclosed to Plaintiffs,
Defendant Giri Saranu put the title to the Gunter Property under his individual name and not
VGC GUNTER, LLC’s; it is unclear why the Gunter Property was never transferred to VGC
GUNTER LLC.
19. Further, Plaintiffs discovered there is a remaining amount of $313,752.05 in funds that
are entirely unaccounted for from the initial $1,908,000.00 collected from the investors in the
name of VGC GUNTER, LLC.
VGC CELINA LLC
20. On or about July 23, 2021, Defendant Giri Saranu purchased the real property located at
FM 543, Weston, Texas 75009 (“Weston Property”) consisting of 45.39 acres of land for
$2,292,174.15 also using the funds collected from investors in the name of VGC CELINA LLC.
21. Defendants also completed this real estate transaction without providing to Plaintiffs any
type of invoice or approval document commonly required to be reviewed for a property purchase
involving VGC CELINA LLC.
22. On this same date, thirty minutes later, the same property was purchased by VGC
CELINA LLC for $2,497,076.05 through a second transaction that Plaintiffs were not aware of
until recently and do not have knowledge of the details of the transaction for the purchase of this
property. The seller’s information, including their name and address, has been redacted in the
final statement for this property provided to Plaintiffs by Defendants,
23. During the time Plaintiffs served as Managers for VGC CELINA, LLC, Nagarajitha
Bandaru was only given authorization to sign the closing documents on Plaintiffs’ behalf a single
time. Between the two transactions for the sale of the Weston Property, there is a difference of
$204,901.90 of unaccounted for funds collected from investors.
24. Additionally, Plaintiffs discovered that there is a remaining amount of $407,826.00 of
funds currently unaccounted for from the initial $2,700,000.00 collected from the investors in the
name of VGC CELINA LLC.
25. Between September 2021 and December 2021, Plaintiffs contacted Defendant Giri
through several phone calls, emails, and WhatsApp message requesting accounting and records
of the properties purchased, including accounting for the excess funds from each real estate
purchase.
26. Defendant Giri Saranu continuously refused to provide Plaintiffs with any information
requested several times over a period of four months. Moreover, in response to Plaintiffs
substantial requests, Defendant Giri Saranu has threatened and harassed not only Plaintiffs, but
their families.
27. Defendant Giri Saranu impeded Plaintiffs from reviewing and inspecting Companies’
documents and as such, Defendant Giri Saranu did not allow Plaintiffs to provide investors with
legitimate information about their investments or Account Balances.
28. On or about December 21, 2021, Plaintiffs formally resigned and officially removed as
Managers for the Companies through a Certificate of Amendment filed with the Texas Secretary
of State.
E. CAUSES OF ACTION
Count 1 — Common-law Fraud against Defendant Giri Saranu
29. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth
in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all
purposes.
30. Plaintiffs assert a claim of common-law fraud. Defendant Giri made a representation that
was material and false.
31. When Defendant Giri Saranu made the representation to Plaintiffs, Defendant knew the
representation was false or made the representation recklessly, as a positive assertion, and
without knowledge of its truth.
32. Defendant Giri Saranu made the representation with the intent that Plaintiffs act on it.
33. Plaintiffs relied on Defendant Giri Saranu’s representation, which subsequently caused
them injury and sustained damages as a proximate result of Defendant Giri Saranu’s fraud.
34. Plaintiffs seek unliquidated and exemplary damages within the jurisdictional limits of this
Court.
Exemplary Damages
35. Plaintiffs’ damages resulted from Defendant Giri Saranu’s actual fraud, gross negligence,
or malice, which entitle Plaintiffs to exemplary damages under Texas Civil Practice and
Remedies Code section 41.003(a). Defendant Giri Saranu is guilty of misconduct which was
committed knowingly, intentionally, maliciously, wantonly, and in reckless and callous disregard
to the legitimate rights of Plaintiffs so far as to justify the imposition of exemplary damages
including the reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees incurred by Plaintiffs.
Count 2 — Statutory Fraud against Defendant Giri Saranu
36. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth
in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all
purposes.
37. Plaintiffs additionally assert a claim of statutory fraud.
38. There was a transaction involving real estate wherein Defendant made false
representations of fact or made a false promise to Plaintiffs.
39. Defendant Giri Saranu made representations or promises that were false and made for the
purpose of inducing Plaintiffs to enter into the Contract.
40. Plaintiffs relied on the false representations or promises by taking action and entering
into the Contract.
41. Plaintiffs’ reliance on the false representations caused them injury.
42. Plaintiffs seek all unliquidated damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
glut 3 — Breach of Contract against Defendant Giri Saranu
43. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth
in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all
purposes.
44. Plaintiffs and Defendant Giri Saranu entered into a valid and enforceable agreement
wherein Plaintiffs agreed to serve as managers for the companies listed above.
45. Plaintiffs’ contractual obligations have been fully performed, specifically, serving as
Managers and attempting to fiilfill its respective duties.
46. Defendant Giri Saranu failed to perform his contractual obligations and breached the
contract by failing to account for substantial amounts of funds collected from investors.
47. Further, Defendant Giri Saranu also breached the contract by Withholding and refusing to
provide management and operation information to Plaintiffs and investors involved in the
companies.
48. Defendant Giri Saranu’s breach caused injury to Plaintiffs, which resulted in damages.
49. Plaintiffs seek unliquidated damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
Count 4 — Breach of Fiduciarv Dutv against Defendant Giri Saranu
50. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth
in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all
purposes.
51. The Defendant Giri Saranu owed a fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs and all the other investors
and members of the companies listed above.
52. Defendant Giri Saranu owed an obligation to be honest and fair in his dealings with
Plaintiffs and the companies. Defendant Giri Saranu breached this fiduciary duty by intentionally
misrepresenting to Plaintiffs and other investors financial and administrative disclosures on the
management and operation of the business. Moreover, Defendant Giri Saranu breached his
fiduciary duty by Withholding and restricting Plaintiffs’ access to accounting and records.
53. Defendant Giri Saranu additionally breached his fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs by
misappropriating the funds paid by Plaintiffs and other investors. Further, Defendant Giri
Saranu’s misappropriation of funds resulted in self-interested transactions Without the existence
of any benefit to Plaintiffs or the companies.
54. Defendant Giri Saranu further owed a fiduciary duty of loyalty and full disclosure to
Plaintiffs concerning the organization, transfer, and use of general partnership assets, which he
also breached.
55. Defendant Giri Saranu continues to conceal from Plaintiffs material information
pertaining to general partnership assets that are being wrongfully used and appropriated for
Defendant’s sole benefit.
Exemplary Damages
56. Plaintiffs’ damages resulting from Defendant Giri Saranu’s breach of fiduciary duty
which entitle Plaintiffs to exemplary damages for Defendant’s intentional breach of fiduciary
duty under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 41 .003(a).
Count 5 — Constructive Trust Sought Against Both Defendants
57. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth
in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all
purposes.
58. Plaintiffs seek to obtain a constructive trust against both Defendants — and all other
unknown entities — for any benefit or unjust enrichment they may have received from real money
or real property transfers from unauthorized or undisclosed transfers from Defendant Giri Saranu
and the other Companies.
F. REQUEST FOR ACCOUNTING AND RECORDS
59. Plaintiffs request Defendant provide an accounting and records of all actions or decision
made in his capacity as founder and manager Value Growth Co.
G. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
60. All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ claims for relief have been performed or have
occurred.
H. ATTORNEY’S FEES
61. Plaintiffs seek attorney’s fees on their claims for fraud, breach of contract, and breach of
fiduciary duty, as described in Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 38.001.
I. REQUIRED INITIAL DISCLOSURES
62. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Plaintiffs request that Defendant disclose,
within 30 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Rule 194.2.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs, Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha
Doppalapudi, request that the Court issue citation for Defendant, Giri Saranu, to appear and answer and
that Plaintiffs be awarded judgment against Defendant Giri Saranu for the following:
i. any and all actual damages;
ii. accounting and records;
iii. prejudgment and post-judgment interest;
iv. exemplary damages;
v. attorney fees;
vi. any and all cost of the court;
vii. and any other relief at law or in equity that Plaintiff is entitled under the causes of
action.
Respectfully submitted,
GUERRA DAYS LAW GROUP, PLLC
By: /s/Hu20 C. Diaz
Ricardo Guerra
State Bar No. 24074331
Hugo C. Diaz
State Bar No. 24116284
Email: hdiaz@guerradays.com
Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC
515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E Ste. 250,
Houston, Texas 77060
Tel: (281) 760-4295
Fax: (866) 325-0341
Attorneys for Plaintififs
10
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Ricardo Guerra on behalf of Hugo Diaz Trejo
Bar No. 24116284
service@guerradays.com
Envelope ID: 63020749
Status as of 3/31/2022 2:04 PM CST
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Hugo Diaz hdiaz@guerradays.com 3/28/2022 3:15:31 PM SENT
Preview
FILED 3/28/2022 3:15 PM FELICIA PITRE 2 CITS'ESERVE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Christi Underwood DEPUTY DC-22-03390 CAUSE NO. SRINIVAS SARANU and § IN THE DISTRICT COURT LALITHA DOPPALAPUDI § 1 62n d Plaintzffi, § § v. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT § GIRI SARANU and § VALUE GROWTH CO. LLC § Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COME NOW Plaintiffs, Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha Doppalapudi (collectively “Plaintiffs”), and file this Original Petition against Defendants, Giri Saranu and VALUE GROWTH CO. LLC (collectively “Defendants”), and will show the Court as follows: A. DISCOVERY-CONTROL PLAN l. Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery under Level 2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 190.3. 2. Plaintiffs seeks monetary relief of over $200,000.00, but less than $1,000,000.00, and non-monetary relief, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attorney fees. B. PARTIES 3. Plaintiff Srinivas Saranu (“Srinivas”), an individual, has appeared herein by and through his counsel of record, Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC, 515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E, Ste. 250, Houston, Texas 77060. 4. Plaintiff Lalitha Doppalapudi (“Lalitha”), an individual, has appeared herein by and through her counsel of record, Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC, 515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E, Ste. 250, Houston, Texas 77060. 5. Defendant Giri Saranu (“Giri”), an individual, may be served at 1333 Corporate Dr., Ste. 270, Irving, Texas 75038 or Wherever he may be found. 6. Defendant VALUE GROWTH CO. LLC C‘VGC”) is a domestic corporation lawfully formed and operating Within the State of Texas, and can be served through its registered agent, Nagarajitha Bandaru, at 1333 Corporate Dr., Ste. 270, Irving, Texas 75038. C. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 7. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter because the amount in controversy is Within the jurisdictional limits of the Court. 8. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §15.002 in that all or substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to these claims occurred in Dallas County, Texas. D. FACTS 9. Plaintiffs are bringing this lawsuit against Defendants as a result of Defendants’ gross mismanagement of funds and lack of disclosures resulting in fraudulent activities relating to newly-formed companies that involved Plaintiffs. 10. In or around June 2021, Defendant Giri Saranu entered into an agreement with Plaintiffs Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha Doppalapudi wherein Plaintiffs agreed to serve as Managers of VGC HEATH LLC, VGC GUNTER LLC, and VGC CELINA LLC (the “Companies”) by executing Operating Agreements (the “Agreements”) for each respective company. 11. The Agreements provided that Plaintiffs would be responsible for overseeing and keeping the Companies’ financial books and records of accounts, operations, and additionally, implementing and maintaining internal controls to ensure compliance with any applicable laws. 12. The terms of the Agreements also granted Managers, and Members of the Companies the authorization to review and inspect the Companies’ documents and other information for any reasonable purpose related to their interest in the Companies including any documents and information required by law to be disclosed. l3. Between the months of June 2021 and July 2021, Defendants purchased three properties using funds collected from investors in name of the Companies managed by Plaintiffs, without their proper consent and/or authorization. VGC HEATH LLC 14. On or about June 11, 2021, using the funds collected from investors in the name of VGC HEATH LLC, Defendants purchased the real property located at 0 N FM Road 740, Fomey, Texas 75126 consisting of 8.19 acres land for $425,872.95. Defendant Giri did not disclose or provide to Plaintiffs any type of invoice or approval document commonly required to be reviewed for a property transaction involved with VGC HEATH LLC. 15. Defendant Giri electronically forged Plaintiffs signatures on the property’s closing documents. Plaintiffs never gave Defendants oral or written consent to sign on their behalf in order to close on this property. 16. Further, Plaintiffs discovered there is a remaining amount of $189,127.05 that is entirely unaccounted for from the initial $615,000.00 collected from investors in the name of VGC HEATH LLC. VGC GUNTER LLC 17. On or about July 16, 2021, again using the funds collected from investors in the name of VGC GUNTER LLC, Defendant Giri Saranu purchased the real property located at 669 Massey Rd., Gunter Texas 75058 (“Gunter Property”) for $1,594,248.05. 18. Not only was the purchase of this property unauthorized and not disclosed to Plaintiffs, Defendant Giri Saranu put the title to the Gunter Property under his individual name and not VGC GUNTER, LLC’s; it is unclear why the Gunter Property was never transferred to VGC GUNTER LLC. 19. Further, Plaintiffs discovered there is a remaining amount of $313,752.05 in funds that are entirely unaccounted for from the initial $1,908,000.00 collected from the investors in the name of VGC GUNTER, LLC. VGC CELINA LLC 20. On or about July 23, 2021, Defendant Giri Saranu purchased the real property located at FM 543, Weston, Texas 75009 (“Weston Property”) consisting of 45.39 acres of land for $2,292,174.15 also using the funds collected from investors in the name of VGC CELINA LLC. 21. Defendants also completed this real estate transaction without providing to Plaintiffs any type of invoice or approval document commonly required to be reviewed for a property purchase involving VGC CELINA LLC. 22. On this same date, thirty minutes later, the same property was purchased by VGC CELINA LLC for $2,497,076.05 through a second transaction that Plaintiffs were not aware of until recently and do not have knowledge of the details of the transaction for the purchase of this property. The seller’s information, including their name and address, has been redacted in the final statement for this property provided to Plaintiffs by Defendants, 23. During the time Plaintiffs served as Managers for VGC CELINA, LLC, Nagarajitha Bandaru was only given authorization to sign the closing documents on Plaintiffs’ behalf a single time. Between the two transactions for the sale of the Weston Property, there is a difference of $204,901.90 of unaccounted for funds collected from investors. 24. Additionally, Plaintiffs discovered that there is a remaining amount of $407,826.00 of funds currently unaccounted for from the initial $2,700,000.00 collected from the investors in the name of VGC CELINA LLC. 25. Between September 2021 and December 2021, Plaintiffs contacted Defendant Giri through several phone calls, emails, and WhatsApp message requesting accounting and records of the properties purchased, including accounting for the excess funds from each real estate purchase. 26. Defendant Giri Saranu continuously refused to provide Plaintiffs with any information requested several times over a period of four months. Moreover, in response to Plaintiffs substantial requests, Defendant Giri Saranu has threatened and harassed not only Plaintiffs, but their families. 27. Defendant Giri Saranu impeded Plaintiffs from reviewing and inspecting Companies’ documents and as such, Defendant Giri Saranu did not allow Plaintiffs to provide investors with legitimate information about their investments or Account Balances. 28. On or about December 21, 2021, Plaintiffs formally resigned and officially removed as Managers for the Companies through a Certificate of Amendment filed with the Texas Secretary of State. E. CAUSES OF ACTION Count 1 — Common-law Fraud against Defendant Giri Saranu 29. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all purposes. 30. Plaintiffs assert a claim of common-law fraud. Defendant Giri made a representation that was material and false. 31. When Defendant Giri Saranu made the representation to Plaintiffs, Defendant knew the representation was false or made the representation recklessly, as a positive assertion, and without knowledge of its truth. 32. Defendant Giri Saranu made the representation with the intent that Plaintiffs act on it. 33. Plaintiffs relied on Defendant Giri Saranu’s representation, which subsequently caused them injury and sustained damages as a proximate result of Defendant Giri Saranu’s fraud. 34. Plaintiffs seek unliquidated and exemplary damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Exemplary Damages 35. Plaintiffs’ damages resulted from Defendant Giri Saranu’s actual fraud, gross negligence, or malice, which entitle Plaintiffs to exemplary damages under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 41.003(a). Defendant Giri Saranu is guilty of misconduct which was committed knowingly, intentionally, maliciously, wantonly, and in reckless and callous disregard to the legitimate rights of Plaintiffs so far as to justify the imposition of exemplary damages including the reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees incurred by Plaintiffs. Count 2 — Statutory Fraud against Defendant Giri Saranu 36. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all purposes. 37. Plaintiffs additionally assert a claim of statutory fraud. 38. There was a transaction involving real estate wherein Defendant made false representations of fact or made a false promise to Plaintiffs. 39. Defendant Giri Saranu made representations or promises that were false and made for the purpose of inducing Plaintiffs to enter into the Contract. 40. Plaintiffs relied on the false representations or promises by taking action and entering into the Contract. 41. Plaintiffs’ reliance on the false representations caused them injury. 42. Plaintiffs seek all unliquidated damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. glut 3 — Breach of Contract against Defendant Giri Saranu 43. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all purposes. 44. Plaintiffs and Defendant Giri Saranu entered into a valid and enforceable agreement wherein Plaintiffs agreed to serve as managers for the companies listed above. 45. Plaintiffs’ contractual obligations have been fully performed, specifically, serving as Managers and attempting to fiilfill its respective duties. 46. Defendant Giri Saranu failed to perform his contractual obligations and breached the contract by failing to account for substantial amounts of funds collected from investors. 47. Further, Defendant Giri Saranu also breached the contract by Withholding and refusing to provide management and operation information to Plaintiffs and investors involved in the companies. 48. Defendant Giri Saranu’s breach caused injury to Plaintiffs, which resulted in damages. 49. Plaintiffs seek unliquidated damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Count 4 — Breach of Fiduciarv Dutv against Defendant Giri Saranu 50. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all purposes. 51. The Defendant Giri Saranu owed a fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs and all the other investors and members of the companies listed above. 52. Defendant Giri Saranu owed an obligation to be honest and fair in his dealings with Plaintiffs and the companies. Defendant Giri Saranu breached this fiduciary duty by intentionally misrepresenting to Plaintiffs and other investors financial and administrative disclosures on the management and operation of the business. Moreover, Defendant Giri Saranu breached his fiduciary duty by Withholding and restricting Plaintiffs’ access to accounting and records. 53. Defendant Giri Saranu additionally breached his fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs by misappropriating the funds paid by Plaintiffs and other investors. Further, Defendant Giri Saranu’s misappropriation of funds resulted in self-interested transactions Without the existence of any benefit to Plaintiffs or the companies. 54. Defendant Giri Saranu further owed a fiduciary duty of loyalty and full disclosure to Plaintiffs concerning the organization, transfer, and use of general partnership assets, which he also breached. 55. Defendant Giri Saranu continues to conceal from Plaintiffs material information pertaining to general partnership assets that are being wrongfully used and appropriated for Defendant’s sole benefit. Exemplary Damages 56. Plaintiffs’ damages resulting from Defendant Giri Saranu’s breach of fiduciary duty which entitle Plaintiffs to exemplary damages for Defendant’s intentional breach of fiduciary duty under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 41 .003(a). Count 5 — Constructive Trust Sought Against Both Defendants 57. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the facts and allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim for all purposes. 58. Plaintiffs seek to obtain a constructive trust against both Defendants — and all other unknown entities — for any benefit or unjust enrichment they may have received from real money or real property transfers from unauthorized or undisclosed transfers from Defendant Giri Saranu and the other Companies. F. REQUEST FOR ACCOUNTING AND RECORDS 59. Plaintiffs request Defendant provide an accounting and records of all actions or decision made in his capacity as founder and manager Value Growth Co. G. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 60. All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ claims for relief have been performed or have occurred. H. ATTORNEY’S FEES 61. Plaintiffs seek attorney’s fees on their claims for fraud, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty, as described in Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 38.001. I. REQUIRED INITIAL DISCLOSURES 62. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Plaintiffs request that Defendant disclose, within 30 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Rule 194.2. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs, Srinivas Saranu and Lalitha Doppalapudi, request that the Court issue citation for Defendant, Giri Saranu, to appear and answer and that Plaintiffs be awarded judgment against Defendant Giri Saranu for the following: i. any and all actual damages; ii. accounting and records; iii. prejudgment and post-judgment interest; iv. exemplary damages; v. attorney fees; vi. any and all cost of the court; vii. and any other relief at law or in equity that Plaintiff is entitled under the causes of action. Respectfully submitted, GUERRA DAYS LAW GROUP, PLLC By: /s/Hu20 C. Diaz Ricardo Guerra State Bar No. 24074331 Hugo C. Diaz State Bar No. 24116284 Email: hdiaz@guerradays.com Guerra Days Law Group, PLLC 515 N Sam Houston Pkwy E Ste. 250, Houston, Texas 77060 Tel: (281) 760-4295 Fax: (866) 325-0341 Attorneys for Plaintififs 10 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Ricardo Guerra on behalf of Hugo Diaz Trejo Bar No. 24116284 service@guerradays.com Envelope ID: 63020749 Status as of 3/31/2022 2:04 PM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Hugo Diaz hdiaz@guerradays.com 3/28/2022 3:15:31 PM SENT