This was an appeal against the judgment and order of the
High Court, dismissing the appellant’s suit claiming
damages for wrongful dismissal.

Court considered whether the learned trial judge was wrong
in his finding that the appellant was lawfully dismissed and
that his entitlements were paid to him.

Court ruled that It is settled law that a master is entitled to
dismiss his servant summarily for any misconduct or for
failure to exercise good faith towards him.
In the the appellant engaged in business of importation of
petroleum raw materials using the respondent’s
transportation. Court found that this necessarily rendered
him a competitor of the respondent. The position at law is
that no matter how much or how little time and attention he
may devote to it, he is deemed to have an interest which
conflicts with his duty to his employer and for this cause he
may be dismissed.

Court accordingly held that there was sufficient evidence to
justify the learned judge’s finding that the appellant was
guilty of gross misconduct for which he had failed to give
satisfactory explanation to the respondent.