Consumer Court Holds Matrimony Site Liable For Not Helping Man Find Bride; Orders 25K Compensation

Brief Facts:

The Complainant registered his biodata on the Kerala Matrimony website on December 2, 2018. Subsequently, he received multiple calls from the company, and its representative visited his home and workplace while demanding a fee of Rs. 4,100/-. The Complainant claimed that he refused to pay until he was provided with details about potential matches. However, the company insisted on payment before disclosing any information and promised to facilitate a match and arrange the marriage. Eventually, the Complainant paid Rs. 4,100/- but did not receive a receipt. Subsequently, the company ceased communication with the Complainant and didn't respond to his concerns. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Ernakulam (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the company.

In response, the company argued that the Complainant was registered under the classic package for three months from January 21, 2019, for Rs. 4,100/-, with a specific Matri ID. The company argued that it operates as an intermediary under the Information Technology Act, of 2000, merely providing access to communication systems for users to transmit or access information. It emphasized that it does not manually curate profiles; instead, users input and manage their profiles. It argued that its terms and conditions explicitly stated that it doesn't guarantee marriage within the service period.

Observations by the District Commission:

The District Commission noted that Kerala Matrimony argued that even if the Complainant gave an application to find a bride in the office, the company is not responsible for providing details of the girls coming for marriage as per the application given by the Complainant. The District Commission noted that the company disclaimed any responsibility for facilitating marriages which implied that the Complainant's lack of success in finding a partner is not the company's concern. The District Commission held that there was no indication from the company that it took any steps to facilitate the marriage process.

Further, the company argued that its role was restricted to providing access to communication systems, with no human intervention in profile management. It argued that users themselves input and manage their profiles, as stated in the terms and conditions communicated to the complainant. Despite these arguments, the District Commission noted that the company failed to provide evidence demonstrating that it fulfilled its promised services to the Complainant. It noted that the evidence provided by the Complainant, including public opinions from social media, supported the argument that the Complainant was not alone in experiencing dissatisfaction with the company's services.

Therefore, the District Commission held Kerala Matrimony liable for deficiency in services. It was directed to refund the amount of Rs. 4,100/- to the Complainant, along with interest. It was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant along with Rs. 3,000/- for the litigation costs.

Case Title: D Ramesan vs M/s Kerala Matrimony

Case Number: CC/19/130

Click Here To Read/Download Order