JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioners being aggrieved of the framing of the issues by the Court of Principal District Judge, Samba (hereinafter to be referred as “the probate court”) vide order dated 19.11.2016 in an application filed by the petitioners under Section 50 of the Probate and Administration Act, SVT, 1977 (for short “the Act”), has assailed the same on the ground inter alia that there was no requirement of framing of the issues in the miscellaneous proceedings, particularly when the facts before the learned probate court were not in dispute and once the learned probate court had heard the arguments finally in the application filed by the petitioners, the same was required to be decided on the basis of material available before the Court, but instead of doing so, the learned probate court has shrugged off its responsibility to decide the matter.

2. Mr. Virender Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were necessary parties but were not arrayed as parties by the respondent in the petition filed under Section 62 of the Act and also the respondent had concealed the material facts from the probate court, so once the facts were not in dispute, the lear