JUDGMENT

Ajaib Singh J

After giving due consideration to all the evidence adduced in this case and the submissions made on behalf of the parties I have come to the conclusion that the plaintiff must succeed in her suit for libel against the defendant.

On September 7, 1981 the defendant wrote to the Chief Police Officer stating that for the first five months in 1981 a sum of $18,000 had not been entered in the statement of account although the cheques were signed by two directors Mr. Chew Peng Loon and Dr. Jenni Ibrahim. This must necessarily infer that these two directors had misappropriated the money belonging to the Pusat Pertolongan.

On October 1, 1981 the defendant wrote to Azman bin Abdul Aziz the secretary of the Pusat which clearly inferred that Dr. Jenni Ibrahim had misappropriated $70,033.93 belonging to the Pusat. The next day he wrote to Dr. Jenni Ibrahim making the same allegation and stating that she should reimburse the sum of $70,033.93 to the Pusat. This letter was sent to the plaintiff at her address in Tambun Heights and a copy sent to the plaintiff c/o Pusat Pertolongan in Kampong Bercham. On receipt of this letter at the Pusat the secretary opened it after getting the plaintiff's consent over the phone. Madam Ramjaan Begum who was then attached to the administrative office of the Pusat also read this letter as it was duly filed in the office records.

In this letter the defendant warned the plaintiff that if the sum of $70,033.93 was not reimbursed he would lodge a police report against her for breach of trust and described the plaintiff's conduct as a criminal act.

On October 13, 1981 the defendant by letter addressed to the secretary of the Pusat proposed several resolutions one of which was that the plaintiff together with a former director Yacob bin Abdul Rahman Scholer had committed breach of trust of the Pusat funds amounting to $70,033.93. The defendant sent copies of this letter to all the directors of the Pusat as well as to the Director of Welfare Services Perak and to the Registrar of Societies, Malaysia.

All the statements made by the defendant in his various letters he had sent out were very serious in nature suggesting that Dr. Jenni Ibrahim had committed criminal breach of trust of funds belonging to the Pusat. By sending copies of his letters to various people there was sufficient publication of the libel by the defendant.

The defence pleaded justification —— that the words complained of were true in substance and in fact. Secondly that his statements on Dr. Jenni Ibrahim were stated on occasions of qualified privilege. Thirdly that the words amounted to a fair comment on the accounts of the Pusat and lastly that in writing those letters he had acted without malice.

There is no merit in the defence as there is hardly any evidence in support. On the contrary there is ample evidence to hold that not only the allegations made by the defendant were untrue but that the defendant had acted maliciously against the plaintiff in an attempt to defame her character.

The defendant's statements exceeded the limits of fair comment as these statements were wholly untrue and made in bad faith with the sole motive of maligning the plaintiff. The defence plea of qualified privilege cannot also succeed as there was no common and corresponding duty or interest between the defendant and the several persons who received and read the libelous statements.

The defendant's relationship with the other board members had not been a cordial one and when he was removed as an executive managing director and replaced by Dr. Jenni Ibrahim on August 27, 1981 the defendant lost no time in expressing his vindictiveness and malice against Dr. Jenni Ibrahim with his letter of September 7, 1981 to the Chief Police Officer.

The defendant took a very uncompromising stand throughout. He made no attempt to show any regret at having made such serious and false accusations against Dr. Jenni Ibrahim. Instead he relentlessly and remorsely harrassed Dr