Court considered whether the indefinite suspension amounted to a dismissal.

 It was held that the plaintiff was dismissed with effect from the date of suspension.

On whether the dismissal was lawful.

Court held that the law was that an employer can terminate the services of his employee at any time and for any reason or for none. Court upheld the position of law that a servant can be instantly dismissed when his conduct is such that it not only amounts to a wrongful act inconsistent with his duty towards his master but is also inconsistent with the continuance of confidence between them.

In the instant case there was overwhelming evidence that the plaintiff was guilty of conniving with the cashier in diverting the defendant’s funds into his own business. 

Accordingly court dismissed the suit holding that the act of diverting the defendant’s money was incompatible with the due or faithful discharge of the plaintiff’s duty to his master hence the master was right to dismiss him without notice.

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought.