E-Paper
Bengaluru court orders matrimony company to pay ₹60,000 to groom for failing to find bride: Report
The groom’s father dragged the Bengaluru-based matrimony company to consumer court and alleged that he was ill-treated when questioned about their services.
The Bengaluru consumer court asked city-based matrimony company Dil Mil to pay ₹60,000 to its customer for failing to find a suitable bride for a groom. The groom’s father dragged the matrimony company to court and alleged that he was ill-treated when questioned about their services.
Also Read - Waqf lands row: BJP protest is nothing but politics, says Karnataka CM
What the case is about?
According to a report in Deccan Herald, the court pronounced the order on October 28 by a three-member Fourth Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru, presided by Ramachandra MS.
In a complaint, the bride's father, Kumar, said that he reached out to Dil Mil after watching their social media promotion to find a suitable bride for his son Balaji in March this year. The Dil Mil team promised that within a month, they would find a bride for his son and made him pay ₹30,000 as the initial fee.
However, when Kumar enquired for an update in April, the company did not respond. The company representatives asked him to wait until the end of April, and even after April, Kumar alleged that not even a single match was sent to him.
In May this year, Kumar sent legal notices to the matrimony company in Kalyan Nagar. The company did not provide legal representation even after the court sent notices, and objections to the complaint were not filed.
On October 28, the court ordered Dil Mil to refund ₹30,000 with 6% interest and ₹20,000 as compensation for bad service. It also ordered the company to pay another ₹5000 for causing the customer mental agony and another ₹5000 for legal proceedings.
The court also highlighted the 2018 order and noted, “If the opposite party failed to appear before the court or file an affidavit from their side, the allegations can be held as proved facts.”
