08 Apr Residince Objection
T.C.
Supreme
General Assembly Of Law
Principal No: 2013/659
Decision No: 2014/252
Decision Date: 5.3.2014
(…In the execution proceedings against the debtor, he stated that his house had been confiscated. 82.it is observed that he applied to the execution court with the request for the removal of the sequestration in accordance with the article, and it was decided by the court to abolish the sequestration.
Iik’s 82/12.according to the clause, the debtor’s “proper “house cannot be confiscated. Whether or not a residence is suitable for the debtor is determined according to the social status of the said person at the time of foreclosure and the needs of the debtor and his / her family. The term “family” here, in a broad sense, covers dependents living under the same roof as the debtor. The amount required by the execution court for the debtor to provide the necessary housing for the debtor to be housed with the said Ones and the amount required for the above-qualified residence shall be left to the debtor and the remainder shall be paid to the creditor.
The purpose of this article is to determine the nature and place of residence that exceed these criteria, and the places outside a residence that cover the rooms and halls that exceed reasonable measures and contain the necessary items for residence. The duty and adjective of the debtor does not require him to reside in a grander abode than the one determined above.
In the concrete case, it is observed that the value of the property has been determined in the expert’s report, which was made as a result of the discovery made by the court, but the value of the debtor can buy a suitable house in the more modest districts of the city, which does not have luxury properties, is not determined,
In this case, if the amount determined is less than the value of the debtor, it should be decided to pay the amount necessary for the debtor to buy the appropriate House to him, the increase to the creditor, and the sale should be made not less than the amount that the debtor can buy the appropriate House to become, …)
The court’s previous decision was resisted at the end of the re-trial by overturning the case and turning it back to the case.
Appellant: counterparty-acting creditor
RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LAW
The law was examined by the General Assembly after it was understood that the decision to resist was appealed during the period and the papers in the file were read.:
Request, HR 82/12.it is related to the complaint of foreclosure due to its substance.
The complainant-debtor, in the execution proceedings initiated against him by the creditor, alleges that the appropriate House has been foreclosed on by the ICJ 82.article requested that the impound be lifted.
The counterparty-acting creditor defended the dismissal of the case.
The court decided to remove the foreclosure with the acceptance of the complaint on the grounds that the foreclosed house belonging to the debtor has a suitable house and cannot be foreclosed; the provision was broken down by the decree of the Private Office, which was received in the same way as the above text, upon the appeal of the counterparty-creditor’s attorney.
File contents and collected evidence; Kadıköy 7. In the execution dossier based on the execution Directorate 2006/15265, creditor A.He. by, debtor M.B. against, Eagle 1 for the total amount of receivables of 36.912.72 YTL.
On 14.11.2006, 2005/74 basis, 2006/7009 decision no. 5.12.2006 based on the decree of execution was initiated on the basis of the follow-up; plaintiff A.He., defendant M.B. the debtor of the executive order, in which the claimant is concerned with the collection of Labour receivables arising from the defendant’s work in the workplace, it is understood that it was notified to the council on 07.12.2006 and that the follow-up was finalized and the foreclosure was placed on the estate on 31.07.2007.
Enforcement Bankruptcy Act No. 82/12 of 2004.in the article, ” The House suitable for the debtor (but if the value of the House is more than the amount of the house suitable for the debtor to be left to be sold in foreclosure.).”it is arranged how to determine the proper house phenomenon by saying. In the reports received by the court, the value of the property subject to litigation is determined, but the value of the house that can be taken into consideration is not determined.
If this value is less than the value of the house in question, it should be decided to sell the house to the debtor, to pay the remaining amount to the creditor and to make the sale of the house to the debtor not less than the amount to which the debtor can buy the house to be suitable.
For the reasons described by the court, while it is necessary to comply with the injunction, resistance to the previous decision is against the procedure and the law and the decision to resist must be broken.
RESULT
Provisional article 3 of the law on Civil Procedure No. 6100 for the reasons stated in the decree of annulment of the decision to resist, with the acceptance of the appeal appeals of the counterparty-creditor deputy.HUMK taking into account the attribution of the article.’nun 429.in accordance with the article 366|in of the execution Bankruptcy Law No. 2004, to the dissolution of the procedure, to the refund of the advance fee to the Depositor on appeal upon request.in accordance with the article, a unanimous decision was made on 05.03.2014 to clear the way to correct the decision within 10 days of the notification.
No Comments