The Claimant joined the Company as a Technical Supervisor on or about the 5th of July 1984.

It was contended on behalf of the Company that the Claimant was terminated because of his poor performance and inability to work with other employees of the Company despite having been given warnings requiring him to improve.

It was also contended by the Company that as the Claimant was not dismissed for misconduct the principles of natural justice did not apply.

On the other hand, it was contended by the claimant that his dismissal was without just cause or excuse and or an unfair labour practice.

An employee's poor performance and inability to work with the other employees of the Company certainly connotes a sense of improper conduct or wrongful behavior on his part.

In the instant case, there have been, apart from poor performance, allegations of the Claimant shouting and arguing with his subordinate technicians.

Ang Seng Choon (Ang for short) - (CW-1), the Manager and Director of the Company, testifying on behalf of the Company, introduced three Exhibits, namely, Co-3, Co-4 and Co-5, being minutes of meeting held on 21st November 1984, 7th of January 1985, and 15th of January 1985 respectively, of the management staff including the Claimant, the Technicians and Supervisors of the Company.

The second minutes - (Co-4) - of the meeting held on 7th of January 1985 again disclosed Alakisandra's complaint about the Claimant, his superior.

It is evident that the three documents, namely, Co-3, Co-4 and Co-5, being minutes of the meetings, were produced by Ang - (CW-1) - to highlight the complaints of the Claimant's subordinates against him (the Claimant).

Perusing through those minutes of the meeting, Co-3 to Co-5, it is noted that although they were typewritten on the Company's letter-heads they bore no signatures of either H.K. Mun, who conducted the meetings on behalf of the management, nor anybody else's to authenticate the gunuineness of the documents.

Having had some suspicion about the genuiness of those minutes the minutes file was requested to be produced in Court and upon perusal it was observed that those three typewritten documents were the only so called minutes on the Company's letter-heads that were filed in it. All other minutes were on plain papers.

Secondly, although Ang - (CW-1) - said that only H.K. Mun, the General Manager and Director of the Company, had taken down notes at those meetings the Company was unable to produce the original handwritten version of those minutes.

Thirdly, while Ang (CW-1) - said that the minutes of those meetings were taken down by H.K. Mun but were not circulated to those present Sunder a/1 K. Palany - (CW-2), a Technician, who was allegedly present at those three meetings, said that after Miss Chua, who was H.K. Mun's Secretary, had typed the minutes, which she recorded during the meetings, she circulated to all of them.

In the circumstances and after viewing the other complaints of the Claimant's subordinates, I was compelled to treat these minutes as suspect documents.

It is now necessary to examine two complaints, namely, Co-7 by Sunder - (CW-2), a Technician, and Co-8A by Alakisandra, another Technician.

The letter of complaint - (Co-8A) - by Alakisandra is another interesting piece of evidence.

There is yet another document - Co-6 - which required to be commented on. This is a complaint by one Jeffrey Loh Kok Lam - (CW-3) which was written out on Company's letter-head and tendered by Ang (CW-1), and this letter is unique in the sense that it was written on Christmas Day of the year 1984 when every body was on holiday.

In the circumstances, I could come to only one conclusion that all these complaints were manufactured purely for the purpose of this Court.

Ang - (CW-1) - al