Kerala consumer court makes matchmaker pay for broken promise

In a ruling reinforcing consumer rights in the matrimonial services sector, a Kerala court has directed a matchmaker to compensate a customer for failing to provide a suitable marriage proposal for nearly nine years despite collecting a registration fee. The order was passed by the consumer forum President Ravi Susha and members Mollykutty Mathew and Sajeesh KP.

The Kannur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that Sreechakra Marriage Bureau, based in the district, is liable for deficiency of services and directed it to compensate, KK Ajith, a nursing college professor from Kannur. He had sought Rs 15,000 in compensation for deficiency in service.

Ajith had enrolled with the Sreechakra Marriage Bureau in 2015, expecting to find a compatible life partner. He claimed that the bureau had promised him a prospective match from the neighbouring Kasaragod district but never followed through. However, the bureau allegedly failed to arrange a suitable proposal throughout the registration period, prompting him to approach the consumer forum.

The bureau did not appear before the Commission neither did it file a written response. The case was, therefore, heard ex parte. Ajith was examined as a witness and he produced his registration form and payment receipt as evidence.

“The Opposite Party (OP) has not appeared before the commission and not proved their defence also. So the OP is directly bound to redressal the grievances caused to the complainant,” the commission held

Holding the bureau guilty for failing to contest the complaint, the commission ordered it to refund the Rs 3,000 registration fee, pay Rs 3,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 2,000 towards litigation costs. The ruling underscores that matrimonial agencies, like other service providers, are accountable under consumer protection laws for failing to deliver the services they promise.

“The complainant is working as a professor in the Nursing College. As per the advertisement of OP the complainant registered his biodata in the OP’s marriage bureau. On 25/11/2016, the complainant had paid Rs 3,000/- to OP’s institution for his marriage proposal. The OP assured that one bride is at Kasaragod to propose the complainant. But the OP is not ready to take a good decision in favour of the complainant. After receiving the registration fee from complainant the OP is not sure to propose a matter to the complainant. The complainant registered the profile ID in the OP’s institution, that exist till the date of his marriage. No specific period is mentioned in the profile data. In each and every year, the OP assured the complainant that the next time a suitable proposal will come.

“The complainant’s old age parents also waiting for the marriage of their son. But for the last 9 years, the OP is not give a good proposal to the complainant. On 24/10/25, the complainant’s father was died due to cancer and his ailing mother is also expecting the marriage of his son. But the OP is not ready to arrange a good proposal to the complainant. The act of OP the complainant, caused much mental agony and financial loss. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP. Hence the complaint,” the commission said in its judgement uploaded on Wednesday. The order is dated June 30.