PUTRAJAYA: A man lost his appeal in the Court of Appeal on Tuesday (Nov 5) to claim RM29,000 in unpaid salary from a cleaning services company owned by a Bangladeshi national.
A three-judge panel comprising Justices Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali and Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, dismissed the appeal filed by S. Gunasegaran and ordered him to pay RM5,000 in legal cost.
Delivering the court’s decision, Justice Ahmad Zaidi said there was no merit in Gunasegaran’s appeal.
He said Gunasegaran, a Malaysian, was not an employee of FM Multi Services Sdn Bhd, as the letter of appointment in question did not constitute a contract of service.
Justice Ahmad Zaidi pointed out the absence of salary slip, contribution to Socso and Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to back Gunasegaran’s claim that he was employed by the company.
Regarding the validity of the letter of appointment signed by the daughter of the company's managing director, who is a minor, Justice Ahmad Zaidi, however, ruled that the contract is valid, stating that the letter was signed by the teenager on behalf of the company and her father Md Harun Sirajul Islam had acknowledged it.
He said Section 11 of the Contract Act 1950 did not apply in this case and the High Court’s ruling that the letter of appointment was void, was erroneous.
Gunasegaran, 61, initially filed a claim at the Labour Court in Subang Jaya against FM Multi Services for arrears of salary amounting to RM29,038 for the period, February 2020 to September 2020.
The managing director of the company, Md Harun, however, denied that Gunasegaran had been appointed as an operations manager with a monthly salary of RM5,000 and instead, claimed he had only agreed to allow Gunasegaran, a friend of his, to help manage three of his companies because he suffered a stroke and needed assistance in running the businesses.
FM Multi Services subsequently terminated Gunasegaran’s services in September 2020.
On May 11, 2021, the Labour Court in Subang Jaya ruled in his (Gunasegaran’s) favour, ordering the company to pay the salary arrears. However, this decision was overturned by the High Court on June 23, 2022.
During the appeal hearing today, Gunasegaran’s lawyer P. Hariraman submitted that his client was properly appointed via a letter of appointment with a monthly salary of RM5,000 but the company’s lawyer Aisyah Choo Abdullah, assisted by Siti Zulaikha Afendi, countered that Gunasegaran was not hired as an employee but merely as a casual worker. - Bernama
