DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016
Case No.431/13
Rajeev Bhargava
Aakansha Bhargava
7315, D-7, Vasant Kunj
New Delhi-110070. .…Complainant
VERSUS
Mr. Rakesh Kapoor
Managing Director
Sycorian Matrimonial Services Ltd.
AB-1, Kamal Cinema Complex
Safdarjung Enclave
New Delhi-110029. ….Opposite Party
Coram:
Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member
ORDER
Date of Institution:01.08.2013
Date of Order :25.05.2023
Member: Shri U.K.Tyagi
Complainant has made a request for passing an award directing Managing Director-Sycorian Matrimonial Service Ltd. (herein after referred to as OP ) (i) to refund Rs.35,000/- and to return Akankasha bio-data and photos (ii) to pay interest @2% on the deposited amount until compounding every month (iii) Award the damages to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- towards mental agony, harassment etc.
Brief facts of the case are as under:-
The complainant was approached by the representative of OP in finding suitable boy for his daughter. Believing the impressive brochure, terms and the promises of following services of package.
- Welcome package
- Bio-data of Akanksha shall be sent to boys family on the approval of the complainant
- Dedicated co-ordinator
- Bio-data of boys for unlimited parted tier the discussion between the families is held.
The bio-data of daughter of complainant was full of mistakes which gives poor impression despite repeated request for making correction. The co-ordinator was found sick most of time. In the failure of satisfactory response, the complainant sent Regd. Letter dated 26.12.2012, 05.04.2013 & 08.05.2013 and all of them remained unanswered. After meeting in the office of OP in May 2012, he was assured that that the bio-data of Akanksha shall be shared as per requirement. In Dec. 2011, the complainant was asked to provide more photos. The bio-data shared was not found relevant. This was told in uncertain terms but of no avail. It was alleged that some of bio-datas do not have no contact number. It was further alleged that the Bio-data of the boys were sent to the complainant without having any discussion from the side of boys. When the complainant made contact with them, it was told by them that they had not received bio-data of the Akanksha. The OP continuously advised that nothing had happened. Whereas they were failing in providing the required services. In fact, the company is in business of cheating and frauds. The OP could not arrange any meeting. Hence, OP had utterly failed. Hence the complaint.
OP, on the other hand, filed its written statement interalia raising some preliminary objections. The OP has acted as per terms and conditions mutually agreed upon by both the parties. There was no deficiency of services in form of lack of efforts or intentions on the part of OP and provided complete support to the complainant in search of suitable match for his daughter, Aakanksha. OP further stated that they had provided suitable profiles according to criteria referred to in the application form and to the choices and limitations of the complainant. It was also stated that a total number of 124 profiles were provided to the complainant in the span of two years. The OP tried its level best but if no positive result could come out then OP can’t be blamed. It was further stated that OP is a match-making agency and their job is limited to collect, preliminary investigation and exchange profiles and arrange meetings between the interested parties for an attendance for the positive result, further both the parties must show interest in each other and be ready to enter into a matrimonial relationship.
OP also stated that the complainant entered into a package deal costing Rs.35,000/- on 06.02.2011 whereby it was agreed that OP would provide the following services:-
- Filling format, collecting documents, photographs.
- Short-listing of the proposal based on criterion laid down by the both the parties.
- Final match making by match making Department.
- Client Servicing –presenting your profiles with other parties.
- Dispatching the proposal through Courier to both sides.
A total number of 124 profiles were sent to the complainant after understanding its terms & conditions. As per Clause (i) of terms and conditions, under no circumstances, registration/ membership charges shall not be refunded.
The OP also assailed the complaint on the ground that the payment is made on behalf of Aakanksha and complaint is filed by her father who has no locus standi. Hence, this ground, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. No cause of action ever arose in favour of OP.
The complainant filed written submission. The complainant filed ex-parte evidence. OP was proceeded Ex-parte vide order of this Ld. Forum dated 07.04.2014 which was challenged before State Commission. The Hon’ble State Commission set aside the said ex-parte order. The OP filed its written statement. On which, no replication was found filed. The OP did not file evidence and written arguments. It is also stated here that complaint was filed by Rajeev Bhargava father of Aakanksha. The affidavit of Aakanksha authorizing for filing of the complaint by her father Shri Rajeev Bhargava is on file. However, ex-parte evidence and written argument have been filed by Aakanksha herself.
This Commission has gone into the records available. First of all, the Commission turned to deal the objection of OP for filing the complaint by Rajeev Bhargava, her father. The same is not sustainable as she had given affidavit in favour of her father – Rajeev Bhargava for filing the complaint. Both the parties have maintained in their respective responses that an agreement was executed by them vide which certain services were to be provided by the OP in return of payment made to them. Neither of the parties bothered to file the said agreement upon which both the parties are placing reliance. It is a fact that the complainant had made the payment of Rs.35,000/- received from Aakanksha.
The OP had listed (a) to (e) as mentioned above, various services to be provided to the OP in reaching out suitable match for his daughter Aakanksha. OP has also enclosed the details of 124 profiles which were sent to the complainant.
It was argued on behalf of complainant that her bio-data was edited wrongly. Despite many request for correction in bio-data, the OP took nine months. Initially this wrongful profile of the Aakanksha made the wrong impression. During this period, they could not arrange any meeting with the other side. It shows their high degree of incompetency and negligent behaviour. The complainant also mentioned the list of services to be provided as mentioned above.
This Commission tried to see list of services as mentioned by both the parties in their responses. No written agreement was produced by either of the parties. The OP could show/place the list of 124 profiles sent to other side. Many letters of Shri Rajeev Bhargava were also found annexed which goes to establish that the expected services were not provided. It is noted consciously by this Commission that no meeting could be arranged by the OP during the period of two years. However, OP had flatly refused to refund the amount as per Clause (L) of terms & conditions. But no agreement containing terms and conditions were placed before the Commission.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and as discussed above, the Commission is of the considered view that there had been some degree of deficiency in services and negligence on the part of OP as the dedicated Co-ordinator was also got replaced on the complaint of Shri Rajeev Bhargava. It clearly shows some degree of negligence and also noted in wrongful editing in profiles of Aakanksha. Considering all facts, this Commission directs OP to disburse Rs.20,000/- to the complainant within two months from the receipt of this order failing which interest @ 7% per annum shall be levied till its realisation. The other requests of the complainant are rejected.
File be consigned to the record room after giving copy of the order to the parties as per rules.
