Advertisment

Madras HC bars Shaadi.com ad over false '30-Day Match' claim

The Court ruled Shaadi.com’s ad deceptive, citing violations of advertising norms and unfair trade practices.

author-image
afaqs! news bureau
New Update
ShaadiCourt

The Madras High Court has temporarily barred Shaadi.com from broadcasting its widely promoted advertisement, which claims users can find a bride or groom within 30 days and offers a money-back guarantee on the user fee.  

Advertisment

Justice RMT Teekaa Raman issued the interim injunction in response to an application filed by Matrimony.com, the operator of Bharatmatrimony.com, seeking to restrain People Interactive (I), which runs Shaadi.com, from airing the ad.  

"This Court finds that the respondent, by employing a misleading advertisement with falsehood, has contravened the Code for Self-regulation of Advertising Content in India and engaged in unfair trade practice. He has falsely asserted that using their service guarantees finding a bride or groom within 30 days and that users are assured a refund if they fail to do so," the judge stated in a recent order.

However, the judge noted that in reality, Shaadi.com’s actual promise differs from its bold claims, stating in fine print: "If you have sent at least ten interests to members and you don't have a single acceptance within the first thirty days of becoming a premium member, we will refund your entire fee, no questions asked."

The court found Shaadi.com’s "money-back guarantee" ad misleading and in violation of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, posing a risk to the public.  

"In the larger public interest, as a prima facie case is made out, this Court grants an ad interim injunction," Justice Teekaa Raman ruled.

The petitioner, Matrimony.com, argued that Shaadi.com was using deceptive, dishonest, and misleading advertising tactics to promote its services across various broadcasting platforms and online websites.

In response, Shaadi.com contended that the lawsuit was merely an attempt to harm its business and gain a competitive edge. The firm further claimed that the suit was a result of business rivalry rather than genuine consumer concern.

Shaadi.com
Advertisment