Madras HC Finds Shaadi.com's "30-Day Money Back Guarantee" Ad Slogan Prima Facie Misleading, Says Real Terms 'Tucked In Fine Print'

The Madras High Court has held that a recent advertisement of the matrimonial company Shaadi.com giving money back guarantee if unable to find a bride/groom in 30 days is prima facie misleading and deceptive. Justice RMT Teeka Raman observed that real terms of the offer, which is "contrary" to the promise made in the ad, are "tucked in fine print". As per the terms and conditions, the money back guarantee is triggered when a premium member sends at least 10 interests but doesn't get a single accept within first 30 days.This prompted the bench to allow an interim injunction application filed by Shaadi.com's competitor Matrimony.com. It observed, “On perusal of the advertisement / offer and paper printout of the respondent [Shaadi.com] as found in the typed set of papers, as extracted supra and coupled with the reasons stated in the preceding paragraphs, this Court finds that the said advertisement / offer of the respondent is in contravention of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 as the “money back guarantee” advertisement / offer made by the respondent appears to be highly misleading and deceptive and the general public,” the court said. Matrimony.com had approached the court against the advertisement alleging that it violated the Code for Self-regulation of Advertising Content in India, Cable Television Networks Rules 1994, and the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. It was submitted that Shaadi.com, thourgh its advertisement has committed deceit and peddled falsehood. It was submitted that Shaadi.com had deliberately made dishonest and untruthful claims about their services to exploit the consumers. The court was also informed that a complaint was also raised with the Advertising Standards Council of India which had a categorical observation that the advertisements were misleading and likely to lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of the consumers. The ASCI also asked Shaadi.com to modify or withdraw the order but Dhaadi.com refused to mend its ways. On the other hand, Shaadi.com submitted that the present application was filed without any cause and was an illegal attempt to undermine or disadvantage them, who were Matromony.com's mail competitor in the market. Thus, it was claimed that the present application was an outburst of business rivalry and filed to scuttle Shaadi.com's growth in the market. It was also submitted that Shaadi.com had put out a disclaimer along with the advertisement making it clear that the money-back guarantee was applicable only if a premium member had sent out at least 10 interests to other members and did not receive even a single accept within the first 30 days. Regarding the ASCI's observation, Shaadi.com argued that ASCI's decision was only recommendatory in nature and had no legal obligation. The court agreed that ASCI's decision was only recommendatory and not binding since it lacked a statutory sanction. At the same time, the court added that Shaadi.com could not mislead the public by making false advertisements whereby the public would be put to cheating. The court also noted that the disclaimer put out by Shaadi.com was only a futile attempt to project as if it was transparent as it was practically impossible for an average person to read the two lengthy lines within the few seconds of the advertisement. The court also noted that even as per the affidavit filed by Shaadi.com, around 1201 refund requests had been processed, which meant that more than 1000 people had already been cheated or misled by the advertisement. The court thus observed that Shaadi.com had indulged in unfair trade practice through the advertisement and made a false assertion that utilising their services would guarantee a partner within 30 days when in reality the conditions were tucked in fine print. “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 indulged in unfair trade of practice and he has made a false assertion that utilizing their service comes with a guarantee that the user will “find a bride / bridegroom within a period of thirty days” and also made a false assertion that the user shall be guaranteed money back in the event they fail to secure a bride / bridegroom,” the court said. Thus, finding that there was a prima facie case of making gains through unfair trade practice, the court temporarily restrained Shaadi.com from broadcasting the advertisement in any medium. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. P. V. Bala Subramanian Senior Counsel for M/s. BFS Legal Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. P.S.Raman Senior Counsel for Mr.Mahesh Saurastri Case Title: Matrimony.com Ltd v. People Interactive (I) Pvt Ltd Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 33 Case No: O.A. No.389 of 2024Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

Madras HC Finds Shaadi.com's "30-Day Money Back Guarantee" Ad Slogan Prima Facie Misleading, Says Real Terms 'Tucked In Fine Print'

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Madras HC Finds Shaadi.com's "30-Day Money Back Guarantee" Ad Slogan Prima Facie Misleading, Says Real Terms 'Tucked In Fine Print'

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers