The Decision Was Based On The Evidence And That There Was No Lack Of Appreciation Of The Evidence, and That The Appeals Were Not In Place

16 Jan The Decision Was Based On The Evidence And That There Was No Lack Of Appreciation Of The Evidence, and That The Appeals Were Not In Place

T.C. SUPREME
16.Legal Department

Basis: 2015/5675
Verdict: 2015/13516
Decision Date: 17.11.2015

CASE FOR CANCELLATION AND REGISTRATION OF THE TITLE – THE EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE DECISION IS BASED AND THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT HAVE A HIT IN THE DISCRETION – THE APPEALS ARE NOT IN PLACE – THE PROVISION IS UPHELD

Abstract: in the case concerning the cancellation and registration of the title deed, there was no hit in the content of the file, the evidence on which the decision was based and the reasons required in accordance with the law, the appreciation of the evidence. It was decided to uphold the provision in accordance with the procedure and the law with the rejection of Appeals that were not in place.

(1136 P. K. m. 164)

Case and decision: the decision given as a result of the case between the parties is requested to be examined by the Supreme Court at a hearing; N. who appealed on the day and time set for the hearing. C.. etc. acting attorney A..O.. and C.. O.. attorney for the Treasury, who requested an appeal against M..with S.. C.. etc. acting Attorney G..C.. D.. they arrived. The trial began against the faces of those who came. The hearing reportedly ended after the parties ‘ oral statements were heard. During the period, the review report and documents in the file were read. the need was discussed:

In a summary of the Supreme Court’s decision to annul; ” M., who left a common legacy. he’s the one who left a legacy of claimants with close.. C..obtaining a certificate of inheritance that shows the last heirs, ensuring their participation in the case in accordance with the method of all heirs or appointing a representative to terkeye, listening to witnesses of the party at the beginning of the real estate, What and who owned the real estate before it, who used it, who still saved and saved this place in dispute, determining who has the right to superior use, eliminating the contradiction between declarations, if any, Made the subject of litigation in the cadastral court and the same root to remain without birakand alleged heritage 417, 467, 495 and 498 of the cadastre of the immovable properties deed parcel No. minutes and records regarding the last consideration to resolving the dispute brought and the defendant and the rest of the bonds the validity of the dated sales 01.09.1960 11.09.1967 will focus on borders and boundaries applying to land properly and that are suitable for the control of the technical expert isaretletilm, the need to discuss whether the defendants ‘ response to the case heard in the cadastral Court on the property subject to the case is binding on them.” At the end of the trial, in accordance with the court’s violation notice, the case was decided to be dismissed; the verdict was sent to the attorney of the plaintiffs and partner muris M.. C.. it was appealed by the tereke representative.

Result: the file with the evidence the decision is based on the content of gerektirici in accordance with the law for reasons of lack of evidence in place by the misses in the case of non-of Appeal and procedures for appeal the rejection of the provision approved in accordance with the law, the Supreme Court set for a hearing 1.100,00 TL retainer of Appeals taken from the plaintiff, at the trial represented by the proxy itself to be owned by the situations in which appeals against the decision of the tuition appeal fees received in advance receiving, whether 17.11.2015 on the day it was decided unanimously.