1. These Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the fair and decretal orders dated 29.10.2011 made in I.A.Nos.871 and 872 of 2011 in O.S.No.346 of 2009 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Erode, in and by which the trial Court dismissed the applications for reopening of plaintiff side evidence.

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff, some important facts were omitted to be explained during the chief-examination of P.W.1 and hence P.W.1 has to be recalled. The said fact is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent/defendant, stating that already plaintiff's side witnesses were examined and cross-examined by the respondent and by filing the applications, the petitioner wants to fill up the lacuna which cannot be permitted.

3. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following:

(i) a decision of this Court reported in 2002 (3) CTC 92 in the case of P.S.Pandian vs. Annai Velanganni Films, Chennai and another

"10. The phrase "good cause" employed under Order XIII, Rule 2, C.P.C., no doubt, requires adequate, sound and genuine reasons, but it depends upon the facts and circumstances of