Marriage bureau fails to provide complete profiles, rapped
Irked over being taken for a ride by a marriage bureau in lieu of arranging matrimonial alliance for his sister, an assistant sub-inspector (ministerial) with the CRPF found a saviour in the consumer forum which held the Sector 36-based bureau deficient in services and guilty of unfair trade practicesUpdated: Jan 08, 2015, 15:35 IST
Irked over being taken for a ride by a marriage bureau in lieu of arranging matrimonial alliance for his sister, an assistant sub-inspector (ministerial) with the CRPF found a saviour in the consumer forum which held the Sector 36-based bureau deficient in services and guilty of unfair trade practices.
Providing relief to Manoj Kumar Dhaloch, a resident of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) campus, Hallomajra, the district consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, directed Wedding Wish private limited to pay `8,000 as compensation to him for harassment. The marriage bureau would also have to refund a sum of `31,000 paid as fees by Dhaloch, along with `3,000 as cost of litigation.
The forum presided over by Rajan Dewan on December 29 held, “The marriage bureau did not send complete profile of men which is essential to establish a marital relation.”
“The marriage bureau received `31,000 as registration fees for this purpose, but it did not take any effective step even to arrange any meeting with the interested party for the matrimonial alliance of the complainant’s sister,” said the forum.
‘Bureau failed to provide single alliance’
Dhaloch was looking for marriage alliance for his younger sister, so he hired the services of Wedding Wish private limited for arranging personalised matrimonial service for his sister.
He said Wedding Wish private limited had agreed to provide the matrimonial service at the membership fees of `31,000 for arranging 15 profiles of men within six months, which he paid on January 14, 2014. Despite making several visits to marriage bureau’s office and requesting them to provide profiles of men, it evaded any response on one pretext or the other.
Dhaloch said the marriage consultant did not arrange or provide even a single profile for consideration, forcing him to move the consumer forum.
Complainant rejected all profiles: Bureau
Denying deficiency in services, Wedding Wish private limited claimed that it had made all possible efforts to arrange the best possible match for Dhaloch’s sister. “We sent many profiles of men to the complainant through emails as per his requirement for his sister, but all profiles were rejected.”