ORDER : Heard both sides. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that the trial Court dismissed the application to reopen the matter, and permit the plaintiff to adduce further evidence on his side by issuing summons to the Tashildar and also to produce documents. The Trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the plaintiff commenced the evidence before the Court on 22.11.2016 and it was completed on 09.02.2017. Later, defendant evidence was completed on 05.07.2017. 3. Further, the plaintiff did not assign any satisfactory reason for not taking steps earlier at the stage, when his evidence was recorded. 4. The plaintiff affidavit filed before the trial Court, would indicate that he had knowledge about the proceedings before the Tashildar right from 01.04.2015 and in fact, he was having a copy of the proceedings issued by the Tashildar. 5. The plaintiff did not assign any reason, why this application was not filed earlier at the time when plaintiff evidence was recorded. 6. Rule 3 of Order XVI of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 is as under: Order XVI SUMMONING AND ATTENDANCE OF WITNESS 1. List of witness and summons to witness :- (1)……. (2)……. (3) The Court may, for reasons to be recorded, permit a party to call, whether by summoning through Court or otherwise, any witness, other than those whose names appear in the list referred to in sub-rule (1), if such party shows sufficient cause for the omission to mention the name of such witness in the said list. 7. The above Rule states that the party shall show sufficient cause for the omission to mention the name of such witness in the said list. 8. The revision petitioner in his affidavit filed before the trail Court did not give any reason much less sufficient cause for the omission to mention the name of the proposed witness earlier, though he had knowledge before commencement of his evidence in the year 2017. 9. In that view of the matter, there is no illegality or material irregularity committed by the trial Court in the impugned order. 10. Accordingly, this revision petitions are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.