T.C. SUPREME
20.Legal Department

Mainly: 2015/8868
Decision: 2016/4945
Decision Date: 21.04.2016

REGISTRATION CASE – CONTESTED REAL ESTATE WHERE THE FOREST CADASTRE WAS NOT MADE BEFORE THE DATE OF DETERMINATION-THE PROVISION MUST BE UPHELD

Summary: According to the statement in the petition, the case relates to the registration of real estate that is not registered in accordance with the provision of the article of the Civil Code. A forest cadastre was not made before the date of determination in the location of the disputed real estate. The real estate subject to the lawsuit was determined as external to the deed in accordance with the article of the law on the deed during the work of the deed … it was finalized in the year. The scope of the file and any decision by the court made in accordance with the process of the court by a denial of the request to be granted by the first decision on the surplus, called by Sketch (d) shown on the section of the letter with the case upon failure of the plaintiff to this provision the appeal is rejected and this section by the party in relation to vested usuli ruled in favor of the defendant was established since …to occur by considering the place that are not seen in the rejection of the appeal with appeal procedures and has decided to ratification by the provision in accordance with the law.

(4721 P. K. m. 713)

Case: at the end of the hearing of the case between the parties, the court of Cassation examination of the provision established by the plaintiff …was requested by the attorney, after the decision was made to accept the appeal petition, which is understood to be in duration, the file was reviewed, considered necessary:

713 of the Civil Code, claiming that a piece of real estate in his village is not registered in the deed, that the conditions for acquiring real estate through the earning statute of limitations are formed in the interest of his client. according to the provision of the article, he asked for registration on behalf of his client.

The court, with the acceptance of the case, decided to register 2353 m2 and 12740 m2 Real Estate indicated by the letter (A) in the sketch of the science expert dated 21.07.2008 in the title deed on behalf of the plaintiff, the provision was appealed by…, our apartment dated 07.05.2009 and …/… the basis, … / … the decision was broken by the court, referring to the need for incomplete forest and possession research.

By the court, a subsequent trial to warrant reversal of compliance, following partially the case with the adoption of the county…, titling, parcel No. 533 external … place and stay in the village and in the North East place external titling, titling external place in the south, west and surrounded by parcels 532 533 No. science engineer with expert … …’s report dated 12/10/2010 and the schematic in (A) with immovable 2353,01 M2 surface area of the district specified in the …and the … … No. 537 and 539 and stay in the village north parcels, parcels No. 537 and 539 East, in the south, the place marked with the subject of the case (B), in the West, surrounded by parcel 538, the expert in science … … and the map engineer … …the property on an area of 2757.13 m2, indicated by the letter (D) in the 12/10/2010 report and sketch of TMK 713/1. in accordance with the article on behalf of the plaintiff, registration and registration in the land registry, rejection of the request for excess, 12/10/2012 dated science expert and map engineer prepared by the report of the decision to be considered an octet, the court 13.11.2008 date and …/… – …/… With the decision of the decision file located between the science-savvy, dated 21.07.2008 and … by Sketch (C) marked with the letter of denial of the request for registration becomes final without appeal 33298,50 section of the M2 to the determination of when decided, the judgment has been appealed by Attorney defendant …our apartment and date 24.06.2013 / based on… – …/… With Decision No. immovable ref sketch of (a) the section of the letter shown with the rejection of the appeal for the appeal procedures and the provision approved in accordance with the law of the case, the subject matter was immovable sketch (d) shown with the letter for the section of the appeal in terms of Appeal is called on the surplus before they ruin a denial of the request; and (D) in the case where the section about letters is rejected, the plaintiff does not appeal the previous judgment because the real person without disturbing the immovable sketch (d) shown with the portion of the letter in terms of usuli vested in favor of the defendant occurred …, although the court should decide to dismiss the case filed against the part of the contentious dispute indicated by the letter krokide (D), the decision to accept it was broken by referring to the need that it was a violation of the rule of procedural rights.

As a result of the trial conducted by the court after compliance with the violation notice, it was decided to reject the case filed against the place indicated by the letter (D) in the reports and sketches of 12/10/2010 of the science expert and the map engineer, the decision was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney.

According to the statement in the petition, the case was filed under Section 713 of the Civil Code. it is related to the registration of real estate that is not registered in accordance with the provision of the article.

A forest cadastre was not made before the date of determination in the location of the disputed real estate. The subject of the lawsuit is immovable, during the work of the tapulama 2 of the law of Tapulama. according to the article, the deed was determined externally and finalized in 23.01.1981.

The scope of the file and any decision by the court made in accordance with the process of the court by a denial of the request to be granted by the first decision on the surplus, called by Sketch (d) shown on the section of the letter with the case upon failure of the plaintiff to this provision the appeal is rejected and this section by the party in relation to vested usuli ruled in favor of the defendant was established since …to occur by considering the place that are not seen in the rejection of the appeal of the appeal with the provision and procedures in accordance with the law, APPROVED unanimously approval of fees yukletilm who appeals to 21.04.2016 day written below, were decided.