Kolkata man cites probe by US law firm on foldable screen ‘defect’, wins Rs 1.2 lakh

6 min readNew DelhiJul 16, 2026 06:00 PM IST

The district consumer commission was dealing with a plea of a man seeing relief regarding his defective Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 foldable phone. (AI-generated Image)

Acknowledging the investigation by the US-based consumer protection law firm regarding the recurring screen failures on Samsung foldable phones, the Kolkata District Consumer Commission held Samsung India and its authorised service centre guilty of deficiency in service for denying warranty repair of a Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 despite a manufacturing screen defect.

A bench of president Kollol Chattopadhyay and member Udayan Roy ordered replacement or a Rs 85,000 refund, Rs 25,000 compensation, and Rs 10,000 litigation costs to the phone buyer.

“The Migliaccio and Rathod LLP investigation specifically concerns the Galaxy Z Flip series and documents a consistent global pattern of screen cracking and blackouts. While these foreign proceedings are not binding on this Commission, they constitute credible contextual material that the kind of defect the complainant is describing, a black shadow appearing at or near the fold, is a known and recurring problem in Samsung’s foldable phone range,” the commission said on July 3.

Noting that the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 5G is a foldable phone whose screen is designed to fold and unfold repeatedly along a central hinge, the bench said that the foldable display technology is known to be susceptible to screen failures along the fold, including the appearance of black spots, lines, or shadows, particularly within the first year of use. This is not merely the complainant’s assertion.

The order highlighted that the US class action complaint placed on record describes in detail how the internal display of the Z Fold 3 (a closely related foldable Samsung model) fails along the fold, often beginning with a minor crack and progressing to a black, unresponsive zone.

Consumer cited global screen defect

A Kolkata resident purchased a Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 5G phone for Rs 85,000 on January 29, 2022. Within the one-year warranty period, on November 15, 2022, the phone developed a black shadow near the fold of the screen, which gradually spread and rendered the device unusable.

The consumer approached Samsung’s authorised service centre, which acknowledged the issue but demanded Rs 29,849 for repairs despite the handset being under warranty, calling the damage “accidental and liquid damage”.

Story continues below this ad

The complainant then filed a complaint before the Consumer Affairs Department, Government of West Bengal, on December 5, 2022. The department attempted to mediate but could not resolve the dispute. The department closed the matter and advised the complainant to approach the commission.

The complainant further pointed out that a large number of users of the same Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 5G model across the world have reported identical screen problems, i.e., a black shadow or line appearing near the fold.

He cited a December 2022 lawsuit filed against the company in the United States as a class action lawsuit (Lewis v Samsung Electronics America, Inc), alleging that the screen cracking and failure along the fold is a design defect known to Samsung. The complainant also stated that a law firm, Migliaccio and Rathod LLP, also investigated similar complaints globally and found that Samsung had not adequately addressed these defects. The complainant submitted that Indian consumers deserve the same standard of treatment as consumers abroad.

Samsung blames consumer mishandling

Samsung stated that when the complainant brought the handset to the authorised service centre, the service engineer inspected it and found a crack on the side of the handset body. Samsung said this crack is clear evidence that the handset was damaged due to external impact, such as dropping the phone, pressing the screen too hard, or mishandling, and not due to any manufacturing defect.

Story continues below this ad

The company maintained that the service engineer, being a trained professional, correctly determined that the damage was caused by an external force. It denied any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

The authorised service centre and the seller did not file a submission, and accordingly, the commission proceeded ex parte against them.

Samsung failed to prove mishandling: Order

Several factors, taken together, lead us to the conclusion that the company has not satisfactorily proved that the damage was caused by the complainant’s own mishandling.

First, and most significantly, we examine the Karuna Management Services estimate letter, which was issued by the company’s own authorised service centre on the very day the complainant brought the handset, states clearly at the outset: “This handset is in warranty period.”

The estimate then lists parts required as OCTA display and rework kits. The OCTA display is the main internal display panel, not an outer cover glass.

A crack caused by the user dropping a phone typically damages the outer screen protector or cover glass; replacement of the internal OCTA display panel points more readily to a display panel failure of the kind associated with foldable screen technology.

The company has not explained why an external impact that supposedly cracked the body would require replacement of the internal OCTA display as the primary repair item.

We find that the company has failed to discharge the burden of proving that the damage to the complainant’s handset was caused by his mishandling.

The complainant’s account that the screen failed spontaneously during normal use is credible, consistent, and supported by the documented pattern of similar failures in the same model globally.

Takeaway

This judgment reinforces that manufacturers cannot deny warranty claims by merely alleging consumer mishandling without credible technical evidence. It also recognises that evidence of similar defects reported globally can support a consumer’s case, strengthening accountability for warranty obligations and consumer protection in disputes involving premium electronic devices.

Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (West Bengal: 033-2252-0448) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Jagriti Rai works with The Indian Express, where she writes from the vital intersection of law, gender, and society. Working on a dedicated legal desk, she focuses on translating complex legal frameworks into relatable narratives, exploring how the judiciary and legislative shifts empower and shape the consciousness of citizens in their daily lives.

Expertise

Socio-Legal Specialization: Jagriti brings a critical, human-centric perspective to modern social debates. Her work focuses on how legal developments impact gender rights, marginalized communities, and individual liberties.

Diverse Editorial Background: With over 4 years of experience in digital and mainstream media, she has developed a versatile reporting style. Her previous tenures at high-traffic platforms like The Lallantop and Dainik Bhaskar provided her with deep insights into the information needs of a diverse Indian audience.

Academic Foundations:

Post-Graduate in Journalism from the Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC), India’s premier media training institute.

Master of Arts in Ancient History from Banaras Hindu University (BHU), providing her with the historical and cultural context necessary to analyze long-standing social structures and legal evolutions. ... Read More

Tags:

Consumer dispute

Samsung

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3