As a girl on the wrong side of 25, whose parents are already aboard the matrimonial website bandwagon, this case from Chandigarh hits quite close to home! Finding a life partner for yourself or your offspring on these matchmaking portals is one Herculean task. But portals like these are only as good as the profiles they carry. And one woman was clearly not happy with the service she was availing.
A woman from Chandigarh filed a consumer complaint against a matrimonial web portal called Wedding Wish Pvt Ltd for failing to fulfil her wishes to find a suitable life partner and get married!
According to Hindustan Times, the twenty something woman from Sector 27 has claimed that in June 2016, she had enrolled herself with the web portal in Sector 36. Like most subscription services, these portals too have plans one can avail, and the woman had opted for the ‘Royal’ plan.
She had paid them Rs. 58,650 for 12 months under the Royal Plan.
In her complaint, the woman claimed that the matches that were proposed to her under the plan were meaningles. And despite repeated pleas, they did not send her suitable profiles.
According to the plan she had opted for, she was to be sent some 21 matrimonial profiles of potential suitors. Furthermore, the portal was also responsible for arranging meetings and inviting her to meet-and-greets with the profiles that she had selected.
Failing to do so, the woman sent a legal notice to the website in July 2016.
On the other hand, the company that owns the matchmaking portal had a different story to tell.
The company maintained that instead of the requisite 21 profiles, they had shown the client 37 profiles as a goodwill gesture. They even submitted call logs indicating that in August 2016, the client had stopped answering calls and taking meetings despite their executives still working on her case.
The consumer forum has now ordered the company to refund to the client the entire Rs. 58,650 that she had paid for enrollment. In addition, they would also be paying her Rs. 7000 as compensation and cover the litigation costs of Rs. 5000.
The consumer forum declared in its judgement that the lack of suitable profiles was indeed a violation of what was promised by the company to the client.
“In the absence of suitable profiles, it was not possible for the complainant to estimate the suitability of the proposed boys for matrimonial purposes.”
Seem only fair, doesn’t it? After all, what’s the point of a matchmaking website if they cannot match upto their client’s basic needs, right?