Honble YADAV, J. – This appeal arises out of a judgment and decree dated 31.08.89 passed by learned District Judge, Balotra, in Civil Appeal No. 14/86, affirming the judgment and decree of Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Balotra, Dated 2.12.81 passed in Civil Suit No. 86/79 whereby the appellants suit for eviction was dismissed. (2). Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the judgments given by both the courts below. (3). Instant Second Appeal is concluded by concurrent findings of fact and no substantial question of law is involved, therefore, it is liable to be dismissed summarily. (4). Learned counsel for the appellant urged before me that the findings on the question of comparative hardships has been wrongly recorded by both the courts below. It is submitted that finding on the aforesaid question is based on non-consideration of relevant facts. (5). Learned counsel appearing on behalf of defendant-respondent refuted the aforesaid argument of the learned counsel for appellant and vehemently contended that the finding on the question of comparative hardships, being a finding of fact, cannot be agitated in Second Appeal. There is substance in the contention of the learned counsel for defendant respondent. (6). I am of the view that the finding on the question of comparative hardships is a finding of fact which cannot be challenged in Second Appeal. (7). Both the Courts below have committed no substantial error of law or procedure in recording the finding on the question of comparative hardships. The findings recorded by both the courts below on question of comparative hardship is just and proper which does not require interference in Second Appeal. As a result of aforementioned discussion, the instant Second Appeal lacks merits and it is hereby dismissed in limine. Cost is made easy.