JUDGMENT Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

An elaborate argument has been addressed in support of this appeal. In essence it is an invitation for us to depart from the majority judgments of this court in Radtha Raju & Ors. V. Dunlop Estates Bhd. [1996] 1 CLJ 755. The background against which the invitation rests consists of facts that are not in serious dispute.

The respondents; and there are 336 of them; were at all material times employed by the first appellant on two estates. These were the Ulu Yam Estate and the Bukit Beruntung Estate. The first appellant owned both estates. But the second appellant managed them. In September 1990, the first appellant sold both estates to a company known as Prospell Enterprise Sdn. Bhd., or Prospell for short. On 6 November 1990, the first appellant wrote a letter to the respondents. It informed the respondents of the sale of the estates to Prospell. It said that the change of ownership would not affect the terms and conditions of the respondents' service. The letter went on to say that the respondents' employment would continue as if there had been no change in the employer.

On the very next day, ie, 7 November 1990, Prospell wrote to the responde