In a recent court case, a dispute over the sale of an information technology company has culminated in a ruling against the buyer, who failed to make the final payment as per their agreement. The complaint was filed by Sridhar Nagulavancha and others in the Circuit Court of Loudoun County against Ramesh Annamreddy on February 10, 2026. The plaintiffs accused Annamreddy of breaching a contract to purchase Concert Tech Corporation by not completing the agreed-upon payment plan.
The case revolves around a stock purchase agreement signed on October 20, 2017, for $675,000. Annamreddy was to pay this amount in three installments: $200,000 at signing, $250,000 ten days later, and $225,000 within one year. However, he withheld the final payment, claiming that the sellers had committed material breaches first. Annamreddy argued that the sellers failed to disclose certain financial liabilities and violated a non-compete agreement. He also contended that these breaches should have allowed for a downward adjustment of his final payment based on decreased company valuation.
Annamreddy’s defense centered on two main accusations: first, that the sellers did not disclose all financial liabilities at closing as required by their agreement; second, that they breached a non-compete clause when one seller continued working with another company offering similar services. Despite presenting evidence of undisclosed liabilities totaling approximately $17,000 and alleging competitive activities by Nagulavancha with U.S. Software and Consulting, Annamreddy’s claims were insufficiently substantiated in court.
The court found no merit in Annamreddy’s arguments regarding breaches of contract or misrepresentation affecting company valuation. His attempt to prove a significant decrease in Concert Tech’s gross margin was undermined by inadmissible evidence—summaries without underlying data—and unsupported testimony about employee departures affecting profitability. Consequently, the court upheld the contract terms and ruled that Annamreddy owed $208,000 after accounting for an acknowledged liability offset.
Ultimately, Judge Mary Grace O’Brien affirmed the judgment against Annamreddy for breach of contract. The decision emphasized strict adherence to contractual obligations and evidentiary standards necessary to substantiate claims of material breach or financial adjustments under Virginia law.
Representing Ramesh Annamreddy was Collin Chayce Crookenden from Vanderpool, Frostick & Nishanian P.C., while James M. Stewart Jr. represented Sridhar Nagulavancha and co-plaintiffs. The case was presided over by Judge James P. Fisher in Loudoun County Circuit Court under Case ID Record No. 1582-24-4.
Source: 1582244_Annamreddy_v_Nagulavancha_Opinion_Virginia_Court_of_Appeals.pdf