As per case facts, the petitioner sought to introduce additional documents in a commercial suit to prove prior use of the "BIG BOSS" trademark, claiming they were discovered late after ... a High Court query. The Trial Court dismissed this application, citing lack of reasonable cause and that the documents were within the petitioner's control. The petitioner appealed to the High Court, arguing that the Trial Court misinterpreted the requirement of "reasonable cause" and relevancy. The question arose whether the petitioner provided a "reasonable cause" for the non-disclosure of documents at the time of filing the written statement under Order 9 Rule 1(10) CPC. Finally, the High Court, referencing legal precedents, affirmed that a reason for the delay must exist, even with a lower proof threshold for "reasonable cause." It found the petitioner's explanation insufficient, noting that many documents were always accessible. The court also highlighted the petitioner's failure to complete mandatory disclosure proforma details. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the petition, ruling that no reasonable cause was demonstrated for the delayed filing.