A consumer court directed a matrimonial site to compensate a man Rs. 60,000 for not delivering on its promise to find a match for his son. Despite paying Rs. 30,000 and making several follow-ups and visits to the office, the site failed to provide even one suitable match. The court ruled that the company did not fulfill its contractual obligations, leading to the financial compensation.
Bengaluru: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Bengaluru ordered the matchmaking website Dilmil Matrimony to pay Rs. 60,000 to a man for its failure to find a suitable bride for his son.
The ruling, made by President Ramachandra MS and members Nandini H Kumbhar and Savitha Airani, found that the matrimonial site did not provide the services it advertised and promised to the complainant.
Read Also: Shaadi.com Founder Anupam Mittal Slams Google’s Actions: ‘This #Lagaan Must Be Stopped!’
The commission noted,
“The Opposite Party (OP) has stated in their advertisement that they provided very honest matchmaking services, where interested applicants can register and the OP recommends potential matches from its data based on the applicant’s preferences… We believe the OP is duty-bound to share the details of registered members with other registered members. However, the OP failed to provide any evidence or even a single profile sent to the complainant or otherwise.”
The complainant, Vijaya Kumar, visited Dilmil Matrimony on March 17, 2024, and paid Rs. 30,000 after being assured that a suitable match for his son would be found within 45 days.
However, despite numerous follow-ups and visits to their office, the website did not provide a single match.
When Kumar sought assistance from the company to resolve the issue, he was met with unhelpful responses and inappropriate language when he requested a refund.
On May 9, Kumar sent a legal notice to the company asking for a refund, but received no response. This led him to file a complaint with the district consumer forum, seeking both a refund and additional compensation for the inconvenience he experienced.
Dilmil Matrimony did not appear at the forum despite being notified, so the Commission proceeded with the case in their absence.
Read Also: India’s Supreme Court Poised to Rule on Legal Status of Same-Sex Marriages
The Commission determined that Dilmil Matrimony had not fulfilled the services it promised, which constituted a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice. It noted that by failing to provide the promised service or demonstrate any effort to meet its obligations, Dilmil Matrimony had violated consumer trust.
As a result, the Commission ordered the website to refund Rs. 30,000 to the complainant along with interest.
Additionally, the forum awarded Kumar Rs.20,000 for the inconvenience caused, Rs.5,000 for mental anguish, and another Rs.5,000 to cover legal costs, totalling Rs.60,000 in compensation.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
