Consumer is empowered to install test meter.

V. Ratnam, J.

1. The plaintiff, who succeeded before the trial Court and lost before the lower appellate Court, is the appellant in this second appeal. The appellant is a manufacturer of twisted art silk yarn and for this purpose, he has installed two twisting machines, each operated by one H.P. electric motor. In 1955, the respondent gave two service connections to the appellant, viz., Service connection Nos. 106/4-A and 50/1-A. On 25.9.1974, the respondent placed a test meter near the distribution main line and this, according to the appellant, has lowered him in the estimation of the villagers, as the fixation of a test meter, is only for the purpose of detecting theft of electric energy. The appellant claimed that the respondent is not entitled to fix the test meter and in spite of protracted correspondences, the respondent did not remove the test meter and it was thereafter, the appellant instituted the suit praying for the relief of mandatory injunction directing the respondent to remove the test meter fixed by it near the distribution main connecting the service connections of the appellant.

2. In the written statement, the respondent resisted the suit contending that some tampering with the service connections of the appellant was suspected and it was only thereafter that the test meter was fixed as per the instructions of the superior officers and in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act and the Electricity Board Manual. The respondent claimed that it is empowered to place a test meter with a view to detect tampering with the meters installed for service connections and consuming electric energy illegally. The respondent further stated that it was not done with a view to lower the prestige of the appellant as claimed. The respondent also contended that the appellant had no cause of action for instituting the suit.

3. Before the trial Court, on behalf of the appellant, Exs. A-1 to A-14 were filed and the son of the appellant and another were examined as P.Ws. 1 and 2, while, on behalf of the; respondents, Exs. B-1 to B-6 were marked and D. Ws. 1 and 2 gave evidence. Oh a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found that the respondent was not entitled to fix a test meter, as it had not made out a case of theft or illegal consumption of electric energy by the appellant and granted a decree as prayed for. However, on appeal by the respondent before the Sub Court. Namakkal in A.S. 15 of 1979, the appellate Court found that the appellant had not established the infringement of any civil right by the installation of the test meter, which the respondent had a right to install and that the there, was no proof of the prestige of the appellant having been lowered in the eyes of others by the installation of a test meter. On those conclusions, the appeal was allowed and the suit was dismissed. Challenging that, the appellant has now come before this Court in this second appeal.

4. The short question that arises for consideration is, whether the respondent is entitled to install a test meter in the manner done either under the provision Of the Indian Electricity Act or otherwise?

5. There is no dispute that a test meter, in fact, had been installed by the respondent near the distributing main line for the supply of energy to the service connections, which stand in the name of the appellant. While, according to the appellant, the respondent is not entitled to do so, the respondent maintains that the installation of a test meter, in the manner done would be well within its powers. Under Section 26(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) the quantity of energy supplied to a consumer and consumed by him shall be ascertained by means of a correct meter and the licencee, if required by the consumer, shall cause the consumer to be supplied with such a meter. Under Section 26(7) of the Act, the licencee, in addition to the meter installed