T.C. SUPREME
\n8. Law Department
\nBase No:2015\/11101
\nDecision No :2017\/2353
\nDate of Decision :23.02.2017
\nLIQUIDATION OF THE GOODS REGIME AND LITIGATION OF RECEIVABLES – DONATION
\nTHE CONTRARY OF THE PRESUMPTION CANNOT BE PROVED BY THE PLAINTIFF – THE PLOT
\nTHE DEFENDANT’S PERSONAL PROPERTY DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE SUSPECT IS A DONOR
\nTHE NEED TO OBSERVE THAT<\/p>\n
ABSTRACT: Since the presumption of donation cannot be proven otherwise by the plaintiff, the revenge of this plot
\nthe fact that the plot is the defendant’s personal property due to the fact that it is a donation should be taken into account in the calculation
\nit should be noted. Based on the value of the remaining statements after deducting the cost of the ground by the court
\nwhile the provision should be established, it is correct to establish the provision by including the floor price in the calculation
\nthe decision had to be overturned because it was not.
\n(4721 Pp. K. m. 179, 202, 225) (743 Pp. K. m. 170) (4722 P. K. m. 10) (6100 p. K. m. 33) (YIBK.
\n01.04.1974 T. 1974\/1 E. 1974\/2 K.) (YIBK. 27.03.1957 T. 1956\/12 E. 1957\/2 K.) (YHGK. 26.06.2013
\nT. 2012\/8-1137 E. 2013\/879 K.)
\nAt the end of the trial between the parties and conducted in the case described above, the Court shall Dec,
\nit has been decided to accept the case and upon appeal of the decision by the defendant, the Department
\nthe case was examined and considered as necessary.
\nThe plaintiff … will receive the deputy by liquidation of the property regime due to the immovable property specified in the petition of claim
\nhe made a request.
\nThe defendant … has defended the dismissal of the case.
\n25.665,00-TL calculated by the court for the immovable property subject to litigation with the acceptance of the plaintiff’s case
\nthe decision on the collection from the defendant together with the legal interest will begin from the date of the decision of the participant
\nupon its issuance, the decision was appealed by the defendant’s deputy.
\n1- The contents of the file, the documents of the case and the minutes of the trial, the available evidence
\nsince it was decided by the court at its discretion and there was no wrongdoing in the case, the defendant
\nthe appeals of his deputy, which are outside the scope of the following paragraph, have not been considered in place.
\n2- To put forward material events to the parties, to make a legal qualification and to apply the law
\nit is up to the judge to determine the articles (6100 p.(HMK 33 m). According to the way the claim is put forward, the case,
\nparticipation in the residual value is related to the will that you will receive.
\nAs for the concrete event; the spouses were married on 23.11.1989, the divorce was filed on 20.09.2010
\nthey were divorced when the decision on the acceptance of his case was finalized. The property regime of the divorce proceedings
\nit has expired as of the date of its opening (TMK 225\/son). Further, another goods regime is selected by the contract
\nfrom the date of marriage until 01.01.2002, when TMK No. 4721 entered into force, since it was not issued, goods
\nseparation (TKM No. 743 170.m), if from this date until the date of expiration of the goods regime, the regime of participation in the acquired goods applies (article 10 of law No. 4722, TMK 202\/1.m). Immovable property numbered 132 Dec 1 parcel, subject to liquidation, between spouses
\npurchased on 12.07.2006, when the regime of participation in the acquired goods is valid, on behalf of the defendant spouse
\nit has been registered. In the liquidation of the goods regime, the provisions relating to the regime to which the spouses are bound are applied
\n(TMK 179.m).
\nFrom the entire scope of the file and the documents examined; 132 island 1 parcel real estate subject to litigation
\nby showing the sale of the land plot to the defendant by the defendant’s mother on 12.07.2006
\nit is understood that it has been transferred.
\nDefendant witness statements, cadastral minutes of the immovable property subject to lawsuit, land registry, official deed and all
\naccording to the scope of the file and the usual course of life, the sale of his mother to the defendant, even if the sale is shown in the title deed
\nare in the nature of the donation. (YIBK No. 1\/2 dated 01.04.1974; No. 123\/2 dated 27.03.1957) of the Supreme Court and
\nThe acceptance of our apartment is in this direction. The obligation to prove is on the side that suggests the opposite of the usual situation. (GCM
\nissue No. 1137\/879 of 26.06.2013).
\nIn a concrete case; since this presumption against donation cannot be proven otherwise by the plaintiff, this plot
\nin calculating the fact that the plot is the plaintiff’s personal property due to the fact that the suspect is a donor
\nit should be considered. After deducting the cost of the ground by the court, the remaining memoranda
\nwhile it is necessary to establish a provision on its value, the ground value should also be included in the calculation of the provision
\nsince its establishment was not correct, the decision had to be overturned.
\nConclusion: By accepting the appeals of the defendant’s attorney for the reasons written in paragraph (2) above, the judgment
\nProvisional Article 3 of HMK No. 6100. article 428 of HUMK No. 1086. in accordance with the article
\nFor reasons written in paragraph (1) above of the other appeals of the defendant’s attorney,
\nrefusal shall be made by the parties in accordance with Article 440 \/I of the CMB from the date of notification of the decision of the Chamber of the Supreme Court
\nan appeal may be made against the decision within 15 days and the advance fee may be paid to the appellant
\nhis extradition was decided unanimously on 23.02.2017.<\/p>\n