23 Jan Valid Lien Must Be Found In The Detinue Case
T.C. Supreme Court 8. Law Department E: 2018/11261, K: 2018/16502, K.T.: 01.10.2018
At the end of the trial between the parties and in the case described above, the court decided to accept the case, and after the decision was appealed by the defendant’s creditor, the dossier was examined and considered necessary.
DECISION :
Plaintiff 3. acting person,…… filling plant located within the boundaries of the business Chief, et al. 3 with the debtor requesting permission for its construction. an agreement between people on the construction and operation of a filling facility, a creditor of the water resource ……He was hired at 22.6.2007,…… 11433 date of 02/09/2010 and the regional directorate with this type of, the borrower subsequent to the approval of the company be given written and notarized contract to be a price to pay in a month to put in if it is decided to cancel due to permissions, the permission with the cancellation of the undertaking in accordance with the provisions of the debtor’s factory …… and the ownership of property passed to the client, because the facility is an integral part of mahcuz, with the acceptance of the lawsuit, he asked for the foreclosures to be lifted.
The defendant is the acting creditor, with the debtor 3. made between the person, … ‘ s 9. he argued that at the end of the leave period, it was decided that the facilities made within the scope of the project subject to leave would be transferred to the savings of the general directorate, but that the embarrassed ones were not included in the concept and scope of the facility should be decided to reject the case.
In court, plaintiff 3. person, the borrower agreed to the construction and operation of water filling facility is arranged with the respective company,…… The regional directorate within one month of the writings of the defendant with the company and notarized to be in a period of a price to pay because to put the written contract, the cancellation of the permits,in the covenants “……” and “Resort” with the words it is written, Therefore, the parties to a business at the end of the period in business …… and all other equipment (including machines) that would actually pass the savings of the General Directorate of the agreed, it was decided to accept the case, remove the foreclosures, and the decision was appealed by the defendant’s creditor on the grounds that the word facility covered the embarrassed goods.
The case is the third person’s 96. et al. it relates to the claim of fortification based on its substances.
Having a valid lien in fortification cases is a condition of the case, and re’sen must be observed at every stage of the trial until the provision is finalized.
Subject of the lawsuit is the 106th amendment of the (İİK), which is in force as of the date of the foreclosure settlement dated 29.06.2010.-110. according to their articles, the creditor may request that the foreclosed property be sold within 1 year of the foreclosure. First 110. according to the article, if the sale of the goods is not requested within the legal period, the lien on that goods is removed. Accordingly, subject of the case dated 26.6.2012 on 29.06.2010 mahcuz case as of the date of fall with the history of foreclosures in consideration of lack of the prerequisite of legal actions legal actions in denial when you should be in writing to be decided upon the adoption of the right not to corruption of the provision therefore had to decide.
Conclusion: for the reasons described above, the defendant accepted the appeal of the creditor’s proxy and the provision 366 and 6100 of HMK provisional 3. article 428 of Humk No. 1086. deterioration in accordance with article 366/3 of the iik by the parties. in accordance with the article, The Court of Cassation can request a correction of the decision within 10 days from the notification of the application, the return of the advance fee to the appellant in case of request, was unanimously decided on 01.10.2018.
No Comments