Supreme Court of the Republic of Turkey
1. Legal Department
Basis: 2014/16696
Decision: 2016/5804
Decision Date: 10.09.2016
ACTION FOR CANCELLATION OF THE DEED AND REGISTRATION – THE LEGAL AND LEGAL REASONS ON THE PROVISION, THERE IS NO MISFAILITY OF THE EVIDENCE – APPROVAL OF THE PROVISION
SUMMARY: In the lawsuit regarding the cancellation and registration of the title deed, there was no mismatch in the appraisal of the evidence, based on the content of the file, the evidence collected, and the legal and legal justification on which the verdict is based. It was decided to uphold the provision.
(1086 S. K. Art. 436) (6100 S. K. Act. 3)
Case and Decision: In the case between the parties;
The plaintiff stated that he appointed …… as a representative on 15/08/2003 to sell his share in the immovable property no. Claiming that despite being notified to the attorney, his share was assigned by the attorney to the other defendant by sale, the sale price was not paid, the defendants acted in cooperation and cooperation, and demanded that the deed be canceled and registered in his name, and if not, the collection of the sale price.
The defendant … sold the immovable by proxy to the other defendant for a price of 10.000-TL, that the bill of 7.000-TL given to the plaintiff as the sale price was put into execution, and 9.000-TL was paid to the plaintiff’s attorney together with the costs, that he paid 2.000-TL in person to the plaintiff when the power of attorney was issued, a total of 11.000-TL. that the defendant … agreed with the defendant … to purchase the abandoned apartment under rough construction at the end of 2003 for a price of 9,500-TL, upon the announcement of the flat for sale, -TL was paid as jewelery and 5.000-TL was paid with a check dated 10/04/2004, but the other defendant distracted them about the title deed transfer, the transfer was possible on 04/08/2004, they spent 17.000-TL on the immovable after the transfer, It is not possible for them to act in good faith, to act in collusion with the other defendant and to know that he has been dismissed from attorneyship, be the main victim himself. They argued that the case was dismissed.
The court dismissed the case on the ground that the claim could not be proven.
Although the decision was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney on time and voluntarily, the hearing request was rejected for value; The report of the Investigation Judge was read and his opinion was taken. The file was examined, should be discussed, he thought.
Conclusion: The content of the file, the evidence collected, the legal and legal justification on which the verdict is based, the lack of inaccuracy in the evaluation of the evidence, and especially the allegation of abuse of power of attorney cannot be proven, the assignment is paid, the plaintiff collects the price through the execution channel, essentially this matter ….. Criminal Criminal In the session dated 03/05/2006 of the court case numbered 2005/1132 E., it was determined that it was accepted by the plaintiff as well, and there was no inaccuracy in the establishment of the verdict as written; Plaintiff’s appeal is unfounded. On 10.05.2016, it was unanimously decided to approve the verdict, whose refusal was in compliance with the procedure and the law, and that the balance of approval fee of 4.00.-TL, written below, be charged to the appellant.
