Lady Justice
ST. LOUIS — A St. Louis entrepreneur has filed a lawsuit alleging that his parents and brother conspired to publicly disseminate his confidential and personal information, including tax returns, property documents and a prenuptial agreement, in an effort to humiliate and damage him both personally and professionally.
Krishna Chaitanya Kurnala claimed in his complaint that the defendants, which were his parents, Venkata Siva Rama Prasad Kurnala, Jhansi Rani Kurnala and his brother Nikhilesh Kurnala, undertook a deliberate campaign between July and September to “smear, intimidate and embarrass” him.
The lawsuit claims that the defendants’ actions caused financial and reputational harm to the plaintiff, who built a successful information technology company in St. Louis.
The filing outlines that Krishna Kurnala and his brother Nikhilesh Kurnala were formerly business partners in several New Jersey-based business entities.
Their business relationship ended acrimoniously and is currently the subject of ongoing litigation in the Superior Court of Mercer County, N.J.
The Missouri lawsuit alleges that during and after that business partnership, Nikhilesh Kurnala obtained confidential documents belonging to his brother, including tax returns, a prenuptial agreement and a North Carolina property deed.
The complaint asserts that Nikhilesh Kurnala later shared these materials with their parents, who in turn distributed them to others as part of a coordinated smear campaign.
The complaint claims the family members collectively agreed to publicly release private documents and make false statements about the plaintiff.
Among their alleged actions, the defendants are accused of making phone calls, sending written communications and posting defamatory statements online.
The lawsuit describes these efforts as a “three-part strategy” to spread personal details and allegations intended to damage the plaintiff’s reputation within both his community and business circles.
Court filings detail a timeline of alleged communications through WhatsApp and email beginning in July 2025.
The complaint states that Jhansi Rani Kurnala disclosed private information to multiple individuals, including relatives and community members such as Hari Prasad Gudla, Jawahar Tangedu, Jagannath Ratho and Vijaya Jasti.
On July 4, the filing alleges, he sent copies of the plaintiff’s prenuptial agreement and a property deed to Lokesh Das and Srinivas Nanda through WhatsApp.
Four days later, on July 8, the complaint states that Jhansi Rani Kurnala emailed a group that included the plaintiff and various members of his social and business community, sharing what the plaintiff alleges were false claims.
Those claims included accusations that he engaged in polygamy or misrepresented his marital status, concealed the paternity of his son, transferred $500,000 in a fraudulent manner from his parents’ U.S. bank accounts, and participated in identity fraud and forgery.
The complaint goes on to allege that the family escalated their efforts by posting a “Public Statement from the Parents of Krishna Chaitanya Kurnala” on social media on July 17.
The filing asserts that Jhansi Rani Kurnala posted the statement on behalf of all three defendants with the intent to diminish the plaintiff’s reputation.
The next day, he allegedly shared a screenshot of that statement via WhatsApp with individuals including Nanda and Ratho.
According to the lawsuit, the dissemination continued throughout the summer of 2025.
On July 23, Jhansi Rani Kurnala allegedly sent a copy of the plaintiff’s prenuptial agreement to Nanda, Sowmya Ratho and Jagannatha Ratho and on Aug. 6, he sent copies of the plaintiff’s 2018, 2019, and 2020 tax returns to Nanda, along with an additional 2021 return to Sowmya Ratho.
The plaintiff contends that the defendants’ collective actions were intended to damage his reputation both socially and professionally and to influence the outcome of the ongoing New Jersey litigation.
The complaint argues that the family members’ conduct amounted to a conspiracy designed to publicly shame him and harm his business standing in the St. Louis community and beyond.
The case, filed in federal court in Missouri, seeks relief for what the plaintiff describes as a calculated campaign of defamation and invasion of privacy carried out by his immediate family. He is represented by Benjamin R. Wesselschmidt and Corbin M. Robinson of Sanberg Phoenix and von Gontard PC.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri case number: 4:25-cv-01509
