JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both sides for final disposal. 2. Present proceeding is filed to challenge the judgment and order delivered by Wakf Tribunal in Wakf Appeal No.2 of 2008. This Appeal was filed present Respondents to challenge the order made by Wakf Board in one inquiry held under section 40 of Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in which property bearing C.T.S. No.132 situated at Satara city was ordered to be registered as Wakf property, the property belonging to Masjid. 3. It appears that the present petitioners, the managing committee of Khatik Masjid Shaniwar Peth, Satara had filed two applications before Wakf Board and they were under section 36 and 40 of the Act. The first application was moved for registration of the Wakf. The first application was disposed of by the Chief Officer by observing that the Wakf was already registered in the year 1970 as a trust under Bombay Public Trust Act as the said Act was applicable in that area and in view of provision of section 43 of the Act there was a deemed registration in favour of the institution. However, the second application was allowed and on the basis of that order, property bearing C.T.S. No.132 Malhar Peth, Satara was ordered to be registered as the property of this Masjid. In the past, only the property bearing C.T.S. No.328 was registered as property of this Masjid. Being aggrieved by this registration, the aforesaid appeal was filed by present Respondents. 4. This Court has gone through the judgment delivered by the Wakf Tribunal carefully and particularly observations made with regard to the nature of the property. It is not disputed that during inquiry, which was conducted under section 40 of the Act, no notice was issued to the present Respondents and there was no opportunity to them to show that it was not Wakf property. The Tribunal came to this conclusion but Tribunal further considered the material produced in appeal before it by the present Respondents, like the recored of City Survey Office and various orders made by the City Survey Office etc. Tribunal also considered that when the Masjid was registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act this property was not shown as the property of the Trust by the then Managing Committee. Tribunal also considered that when the Masjid was registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act this property was not shown as the property of the Trust by the then Managing Committee. Only because the property is not registered as the property of religious institution, due to that the property does not lose the character and this circumstance is ignored by the Wakf Tribunal. However, the Wakf Tribunal has considered the contentions made by the present Respondents that the registered gift document under which the property bearing C.T.S. No.132 was gifted to the Masjid was void and the donor had published notice immediately after the document that his signature was obtained on the document by deceiving him. Such inquiry could have been made by the Wakf Board under section 40 of the Act as it has the power given under the Act to make such inquiry and to give decision regarding the nature of the property. In appeal filed under section 83 of the Act and as provided under Rule 50 of State Rules, it was not possible to the Wakf Tribunal to consider the material which was not given before the authority doing inquiry. If it was before Wakf Board, then there was a possibility of appreciation of the material and then the Wakf Tribunal could have given finding in respect of the decision given by the Wakf Board. This did not happen. When no inquiry as such was conducted under section 40 of the Act, the Wakf Tribunal did the exercise of the inquiry in the appeal and gave the finding that the so called gift document is void. Thus, the Tribunal has exceeded the powers given to it as the powers in appeal. There was no suit and the Tribunal was not exercising the original jurisdiction. 5. The learned counsel for the Respondents placed reliance on the case reported as 2011 (3) ALL MR 981 (S.C.) [Hafeeza Bibi & Ors. V/s Shaikh Farid (Dead) by L.Rs. and Ors.]. This is on the point of requirements of valid gift under Mohammadan Law. There cannot be any dispute over the proposition made by the Supreme Court. All these things can be considered during inquiry which needs to be conducted under section 40 of the Act. V/s Shaikh Farid (Dead) by L.Rs. and Ors.]. This is on the point of requirements of valid gift under Mohammadan Law. There cannot be any dispute over the proposition made by the Supreme Court. All these things can be considered during inquiry which needs to be conducted under section 40 of the Act. This Court holds that the decision of the Tribunal that it is not Wakf property but it is private property of the present Respondents, cannot sustain, at least at present. However, the decision given by the Tribunal that due to absence of inquiry, the property cannot be shown in the register of Wakf needs to be maintained. So, the order made by the Wakf Tribunal by which the order of Wakf Board of inclusion of CTS No.132 is set aside is kept as it is, as necessary inquiry needs to be made under section 40 of the Act. For making the detailed inquiry the matter is remanded back to the Wakf Board. 6. Revision Application is allowed. Rule is partly made absolute in above terms. Both the sides will have the opportunity to give material to show the nature of the property. The inquiry is to be completed within 6 months from the date of receipt of this order, by the Wakf Board.