T.C SUPREME COURT 1.Legal Department Basis: 2019 \/ 3518 Decision: 2020 \/ 762 Decision Date: 10.02.2020<\/p>\n
SUPREME COURT DECISION<\/p>\n
COURT: … DISTRICT COURT 1. LEGAL DEPARTMENT<\/p>\n
CASE TYPE :<\/p>\n
LAND><\/p>\n
CANCELLATION AND REGISTRATION<\/p>\n
In the case considered by combining between the parties;<\/p>\n
In the original and combined case, the plaintiffs, the heirs … and …the subject of the case in which they are stakeholders 1753 Island 1 is assigned by sale to the defendant …who is the Sons of the independent Section 2 contained in the parcel, the assignment is for the purpose of kidnapping property from the heirs, free of charge and<\/p>\n
by claiming that they were collusive<\/p>\n
Land Registry<\/p>\n
with the cancellation, they asked for registration in their names at the rate of inheritance shares.<\/p>\n
The defendant took care of his bedridden heirs ‘parents, made many expenses as treatment expenses, paid his heirs’ father’s debts to the environment, when he could not afford the treatment costs<\/p>\n
muris defended the dismissal of the case, stating that his father wanted the real estate to be sold, so he bought the real estate, the sale was real.<\/p>\n
By the Court of First Instance<\/p>\n
it was decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that it was not muvazaali; the application for the application of the attorney of the plaintiffs …District Court 1. 353\/1 of HMK No. 6100 by the legal department.b.It was essentially rejected in accordance with Article 1.<\/p>\n
The decision was appealed by the counsel of the plaintiffs, but the judge’s report was read and received. The case has been reviewed, discussed and considered.<\/p>\n
-DECISION-<\/p>\n
According to the content of the file, the evidence collected, the legal and legal justification on which the provision is based, and in particular the lack of accuracy in the evaluation of the evidence; the refusal of the plaintiffs ‘ appeal, which is not in place, and the approval of the provision in accordance with the procedure and law, written below 10.00. It was unanimously decided on 10.02.2020 that the TL balance approval fee should be taken from the appellant plaintiffs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C SUPREME COURT 1.Legal Department Basis: 2019 \/ 3518 Decision: 2020 \/ 762 Decision Date: 10.02.2020 SUPREME COURT DECISION COURT: … DISTRICT COURT 1. LEGAL DEPARTMENT CASE TYPE : LAND> CANCELLATION AND REGISTRATION In the case considered by combining between the parties; In the original…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[217,223,220,218],"yoast_head":"\n