their mind with due diligence while granting permission for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural purpose, that too when an application is filed for approval of the plan for formation of layout by the City Development Planning Authority and from the beginning till the formation of layout, it is nobodies case that it is a Forest Land. The State Government – Range Forest Officer in the year 1997 with ulterior motive has opened his eyes and has filed the suit even though they had not taken any specific contention in the earlier suit filed by the present defendant that it was a forest land. It was their case that they never interfered with the possession of the respondent– defendant, who was plaintiff in O.S.No.600/1981. The conduct of the State Government in filing the suit after a lapse of 70 years claiming that the suit schedule property is Forest Land is without any basis and it is nothing but harassing its own citizen, which clearly depicts that the suit is filed by the State Government at the instance of the Range Forest Officer to harass the defendant and very strangely, appellant No.2-plaintiff No.2-Range Forest Officer was not available for cross-examination by the defendant and blissfully, the learned Additional Government Pleader has also remained absent on the date when the matter was posted for cross-examination. When the Range Forest Officer-appellant No.2/plaintiff No.2 has adduced his evidence to prove the case that it is a Forest Land, he ought to have offered himself for crossexamination and when he has failed to appear/present himself for crossexamination, presumption of adverse inference has to be drawn against the plaintiffs/appellants on the basis of the
