JUDGMENT 1. - This second appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent, filed on the ground of reasonable and bona fide personal necessity of the landlord. Both the courts below have come to the conclusion that the personal necessity of Chhaganlal has been established on the basis of the evidence on record. 2. During the pendency of this appeal the provisions of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, which was subsequently replaced by the amending Act No. 14 of 1976. Subsection (2), inserted in section 14 by the new amendment, runs as under : "(2) No decree for eviction on the ground set forth in clause (h) of sub-section (1) of section 13 shall be passed if the court is satisfied that having regard to all the circumstances of the case including the question whether other reasonable accommodation is available to the landlord or the tenant, greater hardship would be caused by passing the decree than by refusing to pass it. Where the court is satisfied that no hardship would be caused either to the tenant or to the landlord by passing the decree in respect of a part of the premises, the court shall pass the decree in respect of such part only." 3. As no decree for eviction on the ground of reasonable and bona fide personal necessity of the landlord for the suit premises can now be passed by this Court unless the question of comparative hardship is also decided in favour of the landlord, it is necessary that an additional issue be framed on the question of comparative hardship and should be remitted to the trial court. I, therefore, frame the following additional issue : "Whether having regard to all the circumstances of the case, including that any other reasonable accommodation is available to the landlord or to the tenant, greater hardship would be caused by passing the decree than by refusing to pass it ?" 4. The issue is remitted to the Munsif, Udaipur City (North) with the direction that he should give opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence on the aforesaid issue and he should return the record of the case to this Court along with his findings on the additional issue within a period of two months. The issue is remitted to the Munsif, Udaipur City (North) with the direction that he should give opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence on the aforesaid issue and he should return the record of the case to this Court along with his findings on the additional issue within a period of two months. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Munsif, Udaipur City (North) on March 3, 1981. Learned counsel for the parties are present in court today and no further notice is required to be given to the parties about the date o-, which they are required to present themselves before the learned Munsif. The pasties are also directed to submit the lists of their witnesses, in respect of the additional issue, before the learned Munsif on March 3, 1981. The learned Munsif should keep in view the fact that this is an old appeal of 1973 and all unnecessary delay should be avoided. The evidence recorded by him in respect of the additional issue and his finding should be sent to this Court within the time li.nit specified above. The record of the case should be sent immediately to the learned Munsif, Udaipur City (North). The appeal should be fixed for hearing as soon as the record is received back from the trial court.Case Remanded. *******