( 1. ) A fervent appeal is made by petitioners counsel for deferring hearing and decision in this matter. However, I see no reason to oblige counsel to make his client happy only abdicating my judicial duties and shutting my eyes to the background facts of the case.

( 2. ) BETWEEN 15-4-1987 and this date, this matter came up before me on many occasions and hearing was deferred on the prayer of counsel that parties may be able to settle matter amicably. Indeed, on the last date, namely, 3-7-1987, non-applicant No. 1 was not present, but the applicant No. 1 was present and on that ground only, the matter was adjourned till today with the hope that when both sides are present, they would file joint petition recording the compromise, as it was submitted to this Court on 15-4-1987. Today, both parties are present - applicant No. 1 and also non-applicant No. 1. Yet, they failed to reach a compromise and settlement and the fact is also that this application under Section 23-E of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, for short, the act, is pending decision in this Court for 1 1/2 years. _

( 3. ) SHRI R. D. Jain, who appears for the non-applicants, strongly urged that