Feedback

Consumer Commission Orders Matrimonial Service Provider to Refund ₹30,000 for Unfulfilled Services

Bengaluru Consumer Court Highlights Deficiency in Matchmaking Services

The IV Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Bengaluru, on October 28, 2024, ruled against Dilmil Matrimony for failing to deliver promised matchmaking services. The court directed the company to refund ₹30,000 to the complainant, along with additional compensation for mental agony and legal costs. This case sheds light on the accountability of service providers in the rapidly growing online matrimonial industry.

Case Background

The complainant, Sri Vijaya Kumar K.S., approached Dilmil Matrimony on March 17, 2024, seeking a suitable match for his son, Balaji, based on the company’s advertisements on Facebook and WhatsApp. Following their promise of finding a match within 45 days, the complainant provided all necessary documents and paid ₹30,000 in cash. However, the company failed to deliver even a single profile of a prospective match.

Events Leading to the Complaint

1. Non-Delivery of Service: Despite multiple phone calls and visits to the office, Dilmil Matrimony failed to provide the promised profiles or refund the paid amount.
2. Police Involvement: The complainant lodged a police complaint on March 30, 2024, but was advised to wait until April 30, 2024, for resolution.
3. Legal Notice Ignored: A legal notice issued on May 9, 2024, demanding a refund, was met with no response from the company.
4. Harassment Allegations: The complainant accused Dilmil Matrimony of using abusive language during interactions, further adding to his distress.

Aggrieved by the lack of action and continued harassment, the complainant filed a case with the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on July 2, 2024.

Court Proceedings

Dilmil Matrimony, despite being served notice, failed to appear or file a defense, resulting in an ex-parte decision. The court relied on evidence submitted by the complainant, including the payment receipt and correspondence, which substantiated the allegations.

Key Findings

1. Deficiency in Service: The court determined that the company’s failure to provide matchmaking services constituted a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
2. Unethical Conduct: The company’s absence during legal proceedings and lack of a written defense were deemed an admission of guilt, referencing a precedent set by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).
3. Mental and Financial Distress: The complainant faced undue mental anguish, harassment, and financial loss due to the company’s actions.

Court Order

The commission passed the following directives:

1. Refund: Dilmil Matrimony is to refund ₹30,000 with 6% annual interest from the date of receipt until full payment.
2. Compensation: ₹20,000 for deficiency in service and ₹5,000 for mental agony and suffering.
3. Legal Costs: ₹5,000 towards the cost of proceedings.
4. Compliance Deadline: The company must comply within 45 days, failing which higher interest rates will apply.

Implications

This judgment emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in the online matrimonial industry. Consumers are urged to exercise caution when availing services and retain all documentation to strengthen their case in disputes.

For service providers, the case serves as a reminder of the legal obligations under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Misleading advertisements and failure to deliver promised services can lead to severe financial and reputational repercussions.