Bad Boys Billionaires On Netflix:Ramalinga Raju Awaits OTT's Reply On Distorted Life Story

HYDERABAD:  A division bench of the Telangana High Court on Friday, heard the arguments of Satyam Computers founder B Ramalinga Raju's legal counsel and posted the case to November 20th, to hear the version of Netflix regarding the 'Bad Boys Billionares' Web series which is currently being aired on the OTT platform.

Satyam Computers founder B Ramalinga Raju earlier this week filed an interim application urging Telangana High Court to direct Netflix to show the episode of ‘Bad Boy Billionaires’ featuring him before airing it. As per reports the case had come up for hearing on Friday when Raju's Senior counsel S Niranjan Reddy, told the bench that  Raju was never informed that they were doing all this for Netflix. He said that only after  seeing the teaser that the petitioner had come to know that Netflix made a series with a title ‘Bad Boy Billionaires’ and used words like fraud and greed against Raju as shown in the teaser. Hence, Raju had approached the court for restraining Netflix from releasing the episode on him.

Ramalinga Raju said he had not given any explicit consent to Netflix to make a documentary film on him. It was Minnow Films and its representatives who obtained some photographs and documents from him and made him believe that they were making a documentary on India’s economic boom.

After hearing their version, the bench comprising Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Abhishek Reddy posted the case to November 20 to hear the version of Netflix.(Source:TOI)

Following an urgent plea from Raju, it can be recalled a civil court in Hyderabad had stopped the release of the fourth episode of the series on September 4th. The Civil Court had issued an injunction on Netflix from exhibiting the web series ‘Bad Boy Billionaire’ about Ramalinga Raju's episode. Netflix went in appeal before the high court. Dealing with the issue of right to privacy vs right to knowledge, the senior counsel also pointed out to cases where even re-publication was found to be defamatory.