No wife, no life: Marriage bureau faces fine after leaving Kerala professor in lurch for 9 years
According to his complaint, his profile remained active without any specified validity period, and the bureau repeatedly assured him every year that a suitable proposal would come "next time".
- Jul 17, 2026,
- Updated Jul 17, 2026 2:58 PM IST
After years of waiting for his marriage, and with his family’s hopes tied to it, a nursing college professor from Kannur has won relief from a Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Kerala. The Commission directed Sreechakra Marriage Bureau to refund his registration fee and pay compensation after it failed to provide him with a suitable marriage proposal despite assurances that continued for nearly nine years.
The complainant had approached the bureau in 2016 and enrolled in its services by paying a fee of Rs 3,000. He alleged that the bureau had assured him of a prospective bride from Kasaragod, but did not pursue the proposal and did not provide any suitable match afterwards. He had sought a refund of the registration fee and Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental agony.
According to his complaint, his profile remained active without any specified validity period, and the bureau repeatedly assured him every year that a suitable proposal would come "next time". He also told the Commission that his elderly parents had long been waiting for his marriage. His father died of cancer in October 2025, while his ailing mother continued to hope for his wedding, he said. He alleged that the prolonged failure of the bureau to arrange a suitable proposal caused him mental agony and financial loss.
After notices were issued, the management of the marriage bureau neither appeared before the consumer commission nor filed a written submission. The case was therefore proceeded against ex parte. The Commission noted that the registration form contained the complainant’s details and that the payment receipt showed he had paid Rs 3,000 to the bureau in November 2016.
The Commission also observed that the payment receipt did not contain any terms and conditions of the bureau’s prospectus. Since the bureau failed to appear and substantiate any defence, the Commission held it liable to redress the complainant’s grievances. Holding that there was a deficiency in service on the part of the marriage bureau, it ordered Sreechakra Marriage Bureau 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 Commission said the amount must be paid within 30 days of receipt of the order. It further directed that, in case of default, the refund amount of Rs 3,000 would carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of the order until realisation. It also granted liberty to the complainant to seek further legal remedies under the Consumer Protection Act if the bureau failed to comply.
After years of waiting for his marriage, and with his family’s hopes tied to it, a nursing college professor from Kannur has won relief from a Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Kerala. The Commission directed Sreechakra Marriage Bureau to refund his registration fee and pay compensation after it failed to provide him with a suitable marriage proposal despite assurances that continued for nearly nine years.
The complainant had approached the bureau in 2016 and enrolled in its services by paying a fee of Rs 3,000. He alleged that the bureau had assured him of a prospective bride from Kasaragod, but did not pursue the proposal and did not provide any suitable match afterwards. He had sought a refund of the registration fee and Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental agony.
According to his complaint, his profile remained active without any specified validity period, and the bureau repeatedly assured him every year that a suitable proposal would come "next time". He also told the Commission that his elderly parents had long been waiting for his marriage. His father died of cancer in October 2025, while his ailing mother continued to hope for his wedding, he said. He alleged that the prolonged failure of the bureau to arrange a suitable proposal caused him mental agony and financial loss.
After notices were issued, the management of the marriage bureau neither appeared before the consumer commission nor filed a written submission. The case was therefore proceeded against ex parte. The Commission noted that the registration form contained the complainant’s details and that the payment receipt showed he had paid Rs 3,000 to the bureau in November 2016.
The Commission also observed that the payment receipt did not contain any terms and conditions of the bureau’s prospectus. Since the bureau failed to appear and substantiate any defence, the Commission held it liable to redress the complainant’s grievances. Holding that there was a deficiency in service on the part of the marriage bureau, it ordered Sreechakra Marriage Bureau 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 Commission said the amount must be paid within 30 days of receipt of the order. It further directed that, in case of default, the refund amount of Rs 3,000 would carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of the order until realisation. It also granted liberty to the complainant to seek further legal remedies under the Consumer Protection Act if the bureau failed to comply.