SENTINEL TO THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
DEFENDANT :
address
attorney :
address
DEFENDANT :……….. Municipality
ADDRESS :……………………………….. Ankara
SUBJECT OF REQUEST : The property of the client is located in Yenimahalle District, Ankara Province, …. Name .. The rest of the parcel is …. since the m2 immovable property was confiscated by the defendant administration without expropriation, it is a request that the compensation of 000.00 TL be taken from the defendant administration and given to the client with the interest that will be processed from the date of this case for the time being, provided that our rights to the surplus are reserved.
CASE VALUE: For the time being, 000.00 TL for the cost of real estate confiscated without expropriation, provided that our rights to the surplus are reserved
descriptions
October A… B… as can be seen from the title deed (October-1) that we have submitted in the annex, the island is located in Yenimahalle District, Ankara Province.. He owns a share in the proportion of real estate with a floor easement of m2, which is a field, remaining on parcel no.
Condominium Law 16. Article “Floor owners own all common places of the main real estate in accordance with the provisions of common ownership, in the proportion of land shares. Decking owners own all common places of the main real estate in accordance with the provisions of common ownership. Floor owners have the right to use it in common places; the extent of this right in places such as general coal Decking, garage, terrace, laundry and laundry areas is proportional to the share of land belonging to each floor owner, unless otherwise contracted.’ as required, the client also owns the common areas of the apartment at the rate of his share.
The real estate in question, where the client is the floor owner, is located on Batıkent …… Street, which is a fairly busy area of the Yenimahalle district, one of the most populous districts of Ankara. The territory where the real estate is located is extremely valuable. There are multi-storey buildings and business centers along the street, and real estate is located in the middle of commercial and social facilities.
The island where the real estate in question is located is on the parcel, 20.. in order to be allocated for public use by the respondent municipality, a staircase was built with the widening of the road and the construction of a sidewalk. This staircase has been allocated for public use without a decision to expropriate it by the defendant administration, without establishing an easement and without paying the price in order to provide a passageway to the Parking lot via Batıkent …….. Street. At least … m2, which is built into the staircase in this way, cannot be used by the client.
ABOUT OUR COMPENSATION CLAIM
The administration occupying the real estate where the client is the floor owner has neither taken an expropriation decision nor made a notification to the client about this expropriation process. In this way, the administration has seized the part that it has separated from the main real estate by widening the road and paving it and building stairs without the consent of the client and without the decision of expropriation without the client’s financial loss being paid to it.
8, which explains the acquisition procedure of the Expropriation Law No. 2942. In accordance to “Administration, asset without stating the estimated cost determined by the assessment committee, agreed on the nationalization of the immovable property, resources, or of the cost of the easement on them in advance or according to the second paragraph of Article 3 of this law is performed by paid in installments according to the procedures in this paragraph and bargain buy, or barter with the image you want to take over the administration of any other immovable property through a registered letter to Maliki in reports.” However, there is no decision or request letter duly communicated to the client by the defendant administration.
46 of our Constitution. According to the article, “the state and public legal persons in cases where the public interest so requires, the actual meanings and pay in advance on the condition that all or a portion of private real estate owned, according to the principles and procedures prescribed by law, expropriation, and is authorized to establish an administrative easement on them.” However, the defendant administration has not paid any payments to the client based on the loss of value suffered from the date of the seizure to date. The part in question has been used publicly as a staircase for many years. Until this time, the client has not even been offered to pay the price. This is a violation of the client’s right and is a process that touches the essence of the right to property.
As a result of the examinations to be conducted by your court, it will be understood how great the damage caused is, given the values of other real estate precedent, the location of the real estate, its impact on transportation and other factors. The immovable property owned by the client has been depreciated by the administration.
According to the established case law, elements such as actual confiscation without expropriation by the administration authorized to expropriate without expropriation, confiscation must be made for the purpose of public benefit, confiscation must be illegal and confiscation must be permanent must be provided. The fact that no expropriation decision has been notified to the client in the case subject to the case, the staircase has been allocated to the public, the confiscation has not been notified to the client, his consent has not been obtained and the price has not been paid; due to the fact that the constructed staircase has been in public use for many years and has become permanent, all the conditions sought by the procedure and the law have been created; it has become fixed that the defendant administration has violated the client’s right by confiscating it without expropriation.
The client’s right of claim is not subject to a 20-year entitlement reduction period. Article 38 of the Expropriation Law No. 2942 entitled “Period of Entitlement Reduction”.article: “is made of Nationalization, expropriation ever made, but the process is incomplete or is not, while leaving public service, or a need for the benefit of the public-allotment facility of immovable property made on malik, the right to sue or immovable property of this zilyed heirs of all kinds related to falls, with the passing of twenty years. This period starts from the date of confiscation of immovable property.” although its provision has been provided for, this decision has been annulled by the Constitutional Court’s Decision dated 04/11/2003 and published in the Official Gazette No. 25279 dated 10/04/2003, based on 2002/112 and Decision No. 2003/33. As a result, it is clear that this case, which we have substituted, is not subject to a period of 20 years.
The confiscation in question is not covered by Law No. 221, Article 18 of the Zoning Code. it is not included in the scope of application of Article 35 of the Expropriation Law. it is not included in the scope of application of the article and is not included in the scope of hasty expropriation. Thus, the act of the administration that is the subject of the lawsuit turns into a completely ordinary tort.
49 Of the Turkish Code of Obligations. According to the article “The one who harms someone else with a defective and unlawful act is obliged to remedy this damage. Even if there is no rule of law prohibiting the damaging act, the one who intentionally harms someone else with an immoral act is also obliged to remedy this damage.” In accordance with the reasons described and the law, the defendant administration has an obligation to compensate the client for the damage it has caused.
Provisional Article 6 added to the Expropriation Law No. 2942. article 6. as stated in the paragraph, there is an obligation to apply for a settlement path during the period between 1956 and 1983, as well as an obligation to apply for a settlement path first and, if a compromise cannot be reached, a price determination case must be opened within three months from the date of issuing the Decisiveness report. However, the right reduction period, which is arranged as a case requirement or three months, such as applying for a settlement path before filing a price claim, is not sought in compensation cases for confiscation without expropriation, which will be filed after the period after 1983. The staircase built by the defendant administration by confiscation is 20.. although it was made in the year, it is not subject to the requirement to apply for a settlement path and the requirement for a three-month period of entitlement reduction.
During this process, when the client owned the real estate in question, the expropriation process was not duly notified to him, the non-negotiable price was not paid, and the expropriation process was not duly completed in this way. Contrary to the procedures and the law of the administration, the client, who is the floor owner of the real estate occupied by this transaction, has the opportunity to claim compensation arising from confiscation without expropriation.
Court of Cassation 5. According to the Decision of the Law Department dated 11/12/2018 dated 2017/15653 and 2018/24250 “The real estate was actually confiscated by passing a road of 1.389,06 m2 and in terms of project integrity, the remaining part of the real estate must be recognized that the actual confiscation has occurred. Therefore, it is necessary to establish the provision of registration and abandonment by determining the cost of the entire real estate.” the decision has been made. In this way, since the valuation should be made taking into account the integrity of the project, we ask your court to first determine the damage suffered by the client.
Defendant administration ……. In order to avoid the expropriation fee by the municipality, the parcel subject to the lawsuit was confiscated without expropriation and my client’s right to use the parcel was eliminated, provided that we reserve our rights to more than the defendant administration, for now, TL 000.00 compensation will be taken with interest to be processed from the date of the lawsuit and the client is required to open this case to be paid to the client.
LEGAL REASONS :
EVIDENCE : ……. Property expropriation and eminent domain municipality Directorate of the Department mahkemenizce relevant information from branch to be asked …… X city council Zoning zoning department housing and Urban Development Directorate by the court the question of the status of the immovable, the immovable Yenimahalle District Land Registry Office Land Records Mahkemenizce precedent that could be asked, and the diameter of the schematic from the Directorate of cadastre of immovable Yenimahalle Mahkemenizce asked Yenimahalle municipality property tax values Mahkemenizce asked by the Directorate of financial affairs, the immovable photos, deed records, The discovery to be made at the scene, expert examination, other other documents before the official departments, the documents counted and all kinds of other delail
