T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay<\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/p>\n
2023\/292 E., 2024\/531 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : Samsun B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 1. Hukuk Dairesi
\nSAYISI : 2022\/2559 E., 2022\/2905 K.
\nKARAR : Davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne
\n\u00d6ZEL DA\u0130RE KARARI: Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 24.03.2022 tarihli ve
\n2021\/2552 Esas, 2022\/2422 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 BOZMA karar\u0131<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki tapu iptali ve tescil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde alacak davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kabul\u00fcne, daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince verilen karar\u0131n davac\u0131 vekili ile daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince istinaf ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonunda bozulmu\u015f, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Direnme karar\u0131 daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan g\u00fcndem ve dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
I. DAVA
\nDavac\u0131 vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde; m\u00fcvekkilinin miras b\u0131rakan\u0131 olan babas\u0131n\u0131n payda\u015f\u0131 oldu\u011fu dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 Samsun ili, Atakum il\u00e7esi, Alanl\u0131 Mahallesi 3850 ada 7 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ili\u015fkin olarak daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n e\u015fi dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 … ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi ve arsa pay\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 in\u015faat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlendi\u011fini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ve in\u015faat\u0131n t\u00fcm i\u015flemlerinin daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan takip edildi\u011fini, daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n \u00f6lmesi nedeniyle daha \u00f6nce ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 Samsun 5. Noterli\u011finin 11.06.2018 tarihli ve 08050 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 vek\u00e2letname ile i\u015flem yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, sat\u0131\u015f yetkisini i\u00e7erir yeni bir vek\u00e2letname gerekti\u011fini belirterek 31.07.2019 tarihinde m\u00fcvekkilini kand\u0131r\u0131p aldatarak t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar ad\u0131na yeni bir vek\u00e2letname ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve intikalen miras b\u0131rakan ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 dava konusu Samsun ili, Atakum il\u00e7esi, Alanl\u0131 Mahallesi 3850 ada 8 say\u0131l\u0131 parseldeki 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcmde davac\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n paylar\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 01.08.2019 tarihinde m\u00fcvekkili …’ya sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle vek\u00e2leten ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 19 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn miras\u00e7\u0131lardan …’a devri i\u00e7in de 02.08.2019 tarihinde daval\u0131 …’ya vek\u00e2letname verildi\u011fini, daha sonra vekil …\u2019n\u0131n davac\u0131 ile ileti\u015fime ge\u00e7erek verilen son vek\u00e2letnamede sorun oldu\u011funu ve notere gitmeleri gerekti\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, sorunu gidermek i\u00e7in notere gidip 05.08.2019 tarihinde i\u015flem yapt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, ancak yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin bir \u00f6nceki vek\u00e2letnameyle ilgili olmay\u0131p 31.07.2019 tarihli vek\u00e2letnameye ek d\u00fczeltme beyan\u0131 \u015feklinde oldu\u011funu, bu \u015fekilde 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcme ili\u015fkin sat\u0131\u015f yetkisi verildi\u011fini, ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn vekil olan daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan m\u00fcvekkili ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’ye sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik edildi\u011fini, devrin daval\u0131 …’in di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’dan olan alaca\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak daval\u0131 …’in evi dahi g\u00f6rmeden sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve evin anahtar\u0131n\u0131n h\u00e2len m\u00fcvekkilinde oldu\u011funu, vekil taraf\u0131ndan vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131lar\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015f birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde hareket ettiklerini ileri s\u00fcrerek dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile m\u00fcvekkili ad\u0131na tesciline, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn dava tarihi itibariyle rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferinin belirlenerek bu bedelin dava tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131lardan tahsiline karar verilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. CEVAP
\n1. Daval\u0131 … vekili cevap dilek\u00e7esinde; iddialar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi yans\u0131tmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n kendi iste\u011fi ile vek\u00e2letname verdi\u011fini, m\u00fcvekkilinin sadakat ve \u00f6zenle hareket edip vekil edenin menfaatlerini korudu\u011funu, di\u011fer daval\u0131 ad\u0131na olu\u015fan kayd\u0131n hukuka uygun ve ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011funu belirterek davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2. Daval\u0131 … vekili cevap dilek\u00e7esinde; m\u00fcvekkilinin dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn bulundu\u011fu blo\u011fun arka taraf\u0131nda yer alan ve di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n m\u00fcteahhitli\u011fini yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bloktan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, 295.000,00 TL olan sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 banka havalesiyle bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 da elden \u00f6dedi\u011fini, daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n sat\u0131n al\u0131nan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm yerine davaya konu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc devretti\u011fini, buna gerek\u00e7e olarak da davaya konu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn bulundu\u011fu blo\u011fun yap\u0131m\u0131 ile kendisinin ilgilendi\u011fini, sat\u0131\u015fa konu olan arka bloktaki ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm ile becayi\u015f edildi\u011fini, ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc vermeye ve devre yetkili oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn iyiniyetle ve bedeli \u00f6denmek suretiyle temlik al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARI
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin 23.02.2021 tarihli ve 2019\/421 Esas, 2021\/116 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; davac\u0131n\u0131n, Samsun 5. Noterli\u011fi\u2019nin 31.07.2019 tarihli ve ayn\u0131 noterli\u011fin 05.08.2019 tarihli vek\u00e2letnameleriyle miras b\u0131rakan …\u2019den ad\u0131na intikal eden dava konusu 3850 ada 8 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcmdeki hak ve hisselerinin tamam\u0131n\u0131 diledi\u011fi bedel ve \u015fartlarda diledi\u011fi ki\u015fiye satmas\u0131 ve gerekli i\u015flemleri yapmas\u0131 i\u00e7in daval\u0131 …’\u0131 vekil tayin etti\u011fi, daval\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 18 No.lu daireyi 05.08.2019 tarihli sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi ile di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019e 179.681,20 TL bedelle temlik etti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n murisi … ile daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n e\u015fi Canan aras\u0131nda dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi ve arsa pay\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 in\u015faat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dava konusu vek\u00e2letler d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7 de\u011fi\u015fik vek\u00e2letnameyle vekil tayin edildi\u011fi, vekilin, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131nda olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen vekil …’n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc di\u011fer daval\u0131ya temlik etti\u011fi ve sat\u0131\u015f bedelini davac\u0131ya \u00f6dedi\u011fini ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’in k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli oldu\u011funun ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu ve vekil edeni ba\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle iyiniyetli oldu\u011fu, bu nedenle daval\u0131 … aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n reddine, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin iyiniyetli olmas\u0131 nedeniyle tapu iptali ve tescil karar\u0131 verilmedi\u011finden vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanarak vekil eden davac\u0131y\u0131 zarara u\u011fratan daval\u0131 … aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat talepli davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile 306.000,00 TL\u2019nin dava tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131 …\u2019dan al\u0131narak davac\u0131ya verilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130ST\u0130NAF
\nA. \u0130stinaf Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde davac\u0131 vekili ve daval\u0131 … vekili istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. Gerek\u00e7e ve Sonu\u00e7
\nB\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin 31.05.2021 tarihli ve 2021\/909 Esas, 2021\/1085 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re, daval\u0131lar\u0131n da kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere daval\u0131 vekil … ile daval\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi \u0130skender aras\u0131nda \u00f6nceye dayal\u0131 tan\u0131\u015f\u0131kl\u0131k ve daire al\u0131m sat\u0131m\u0131ndan kaynakl\u0131 akdi ili\u015fki bulundu\u011fu, bu akdi ili\u015fkiye dayanarak daval\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi \u0130skender’in daval\u0131 vekil …’dan alacakl\u0131 oldu\u011funu ve bu alaca\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle edindi\u011fini savundu\u011fu, bir ba\u015fka anlat\u0131mla dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz i\u00e7in daval\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi \u0130skender’in daval\u0131 vekil …’ya sat\u0131\u015f bedeli \u00f6demedi\u011fi, daval\u0131 vekil …’dan olan alaca\u011f\u0131na mahsuben dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc edindi\u011fi, daval\u0131 vekil taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin davac\u0131ya \u00f6dendi\u011fine dair herhangi bir ispat\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcvenine dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131, vekilin \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zeterek sadakat ve \u00f6zenle yerine getirmesi gerekti\u011fi, vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekilin sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi, vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli olup vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu oldu\u011fu, somut olayda, daval\u0131 vekil …\u2019n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi konumunda olan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019e olan \u015fahsi borcuna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k davac\u0131ya ait ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc vek\u00e2letnameye istinaden sat\u0131\u015f g\u00f6stermek suretiyle devrederek vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zetmedi\u011fi ve sadakat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131 davrand\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin de vekile ait olmayan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc, m\u00fclk sahibi vek\u00e2let verenle ilgisi bulunmayan, vekilden olan \u015fahsi alaca\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k mahsupla\u015fmak suretiyle edindi\u011fini bildi\u011fi, bu durumda iyiniyetli kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile vekilin \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde olduklar\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncelikli talebi olan tapu iptali ve tescil isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davac\u0131 vekili ve daval\u0131 … vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ve \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na olan tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
V. BOZMA VE BOZMADAN SONRAK\u0130 YARGILAMA S\u00dcREC\u0130
\nA. Bozma Karar\u0131
\n1. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde daval\u0131 … vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 24.03.2022 tarihli ve 2021\/2552 Esas, 2022\/2422 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile;
\n“…3.3.1. Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011finden ve toplanan delillerden, \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 3850 ada 8 parseldeki 18 nolu mesken davac\u0131n\u0131n mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131 … ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iken, 27\/06\/2018 tarihinde \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 17\/04\/2019 tarihinde miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 ad\u0131na intikal etti\u011fi, davac\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n, 18 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn al\u0131m yetkisini i\u00e7erir Samsun 5. Noterli\u011finin 31\/07\/2019 tarihli, 13239 yevmiye numaral\u0131 vekaletnamesi ile daval\u0131 …\u2019y\u0131 vekil tayin etti\u011fi, vekil …\u2019n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131n (miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n) paylar\u0131n\u0131 01\/08\/2019 tarihinde davac\u0131 ad\u0131na sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, b\u00f6ylelikle davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tamam\u0131na malik oldu\u011fu; ayr\u0131ca, davac\u0131n\u0131n Samsun 5. Noterli\u011finin 31\/07\/2019 tarihli, 13238 yevmiye numaral\u0131 vekaletnamesi ve 05\/08\/2019 tarihli d\u00fczeltme beyan\u0131 ile davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 hususunda yine daval\u0131 …\u2019y\u0131 vekil k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, vekilin davac\u0131ya ait ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 05\/08\/2019 tarihinde di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019e sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik etti\u011fi, akitte sat\u0131\u015f bedeli 179.681,20 TL olarak g\u00f6sterilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n de\u011ferinin 306.000,00 TL oldu\u011funun ke\u015ffen saptand\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 …\u2019y\u0131 07\/08\/2019 tarihinde vekillikten azletti\u011fi kay\u0131tlarla sabittir.
\n3.3.2. Somut olayda, vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispat y\u00fck\u00fc davac\u0131da olup dinlenen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndan ve dosya kapsam\u0131ndan, daval\u0131 …\u2019in m\u00fcteahhitlik yapmakta olan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu binadan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, sat\u0131\u015f bedelini sat\u0131c\u0131 …\u2019ya \u00f6dedi\u011fi, ancak …\u2019n\u0131n aralar\u0131nda kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc teslim etmeyip onun yerine davac\u0131ya ait \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 18 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc davac\u0131dan alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu vekaletname ile daval\u0131 …\u2019e devretti\u011fi, daval\u0131 …\u2019in di\u011fer daval\u0131 … ile el ve i\u015f birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde hareket etti\u011finin ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 vekil s\u0131fat\u0131yla temlik eden daval\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f bedelini davac\u0131ya \u00f6dedi\u011fine ili\u015fkin dosya i\u00e7erisinde delil bulunmamaktad\u0131r.
\n3.3.3. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, daval\u0131 … hakk\u0131ndaki davan\u0131n reddi ile, vekil olan daval\u0131 … hakk\u0131ndaki terditli tazminat iste\u011finin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken delillerin takdirinde hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir,…” gerek\u00e7esiyle karar bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince Verilen Direnme Karar\u0131
\nB\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131 ile; \u00f6nceki karar gerek\u00e7esi tekrar edilmek suretiyle direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
VI. TEMY\u0130Z
\nA. Temyiz Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar
\nB\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen direnme karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde daval\u0131 … vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. Temyiz Sebepleri
\nDaval\u0131 … vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin iyiniyetli \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi olup, di\u011fer daval\u0131 … ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015f birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde hareket etmedi\u011fini, daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmedi\u011fini, daval\u0131 …’dan daire sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 nedeniyle alacakl\u0131 oldu\u011funu, y\u0131llarca paras\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6dedi\u011fi h\u00e2lde alamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dairenin yerine ba\u015fka bir daireyi alarak alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kurtard\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 …’ya yap\u0131lan \u00f6demeleri g\u00f6steren banka kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n dosyaya sunuldu\u011funu, paran\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi ki\u015finin daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n e\u015fi oldu\u011funu, m\u00fcteahhitlik i\u015flerini e\u015finden ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 vek\u00e2letname ile y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, bu nedenle \u00f6demelerin daval\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fi ad\u0131na yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilinin davaya konu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn bedeli kadar \u00f6deme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ekonomik durumunun daireyi sat\u0131n alabilecek d\u00fczeyin \u00e7ok \u00fczerinde oldu\u011funu belirterek direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
C. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k
\nDirenme yolu ile Hukuk Genel Kurulu \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn daval\u0131 vekil … taraf\u0131ndan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019ye sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 somut olayda, daval\u0131 …\u2019nin iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 vekil … ile i\u015f birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde hareket edip etmedi\u011fi, buradan var\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re davac\u0131n\u0131n tapu iptali ve tescil talebinin yerinde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
D. Gerek\u00e7e
\n1. \u0130lgili Hukuk
\n1. 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu’nun (6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun) 502 nci maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131, 504 \u00fcnc\u00fc maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131, 505 inci maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 ve 506 nc\u0131 maddesi.<\/p>\n
2. 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun (4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun) 2, 3 ve 6 nc\u0131 maddeleri.<\/p>\n
2. De\u011ferlendirme
\n1. Dava, vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 olarak a\u00e7\u0131lan tapu iptali ve tescil, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde alacak istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Bilindi\u011fi gibi 01.07.2012 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 502 nci maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi; vekilin vek\u00e2let verenin bir i\u015fini g\u00f6rmeyi veya i\u015flemini yapmay\u0131 \u00fcstlendi\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fme olarak tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Geni\u015f anlamda bir i\u015f g\u00f6rme s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi olan vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesiyle vekil, kendisine verilen i\u015fin ya da i\u015flemin vek\u00e2let verenin irade ve yarar\u0131na uygun olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmesini, yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenir.<\/p>\n
3. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin taraflar\u0131 vek\u00e2let veren ile vekildir. Vek\u00e2let veren ger\u00e7ek veya t\u00fczel ki\u015fi olabilece\u011fi gibi vekil de ger\u00e7ek ya da t\u00fczel ki\u015fi olabilir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusunu ise herhangi bir hukuki i\u015flem yahut maddi bir eylemin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 olu\u015fturabilir. Ancak s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli olmas\u0131 i\u00e7in konusunun m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmas\u0131 yan\u0131nda kanunun emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine, ahlaka, kamu d\u00fczenine ve ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmamas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
4. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesini, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 40 il\u00e2 48 inci maddeleri aras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen temsil ili\u015fkisi ile kar\u0131\u015ft\u0131rmamak gerekir. Aralar\u0131nda yak\u0131n bir ilgi bulunmakla birlikte vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile vekil vek\u00e2let verenin bir i\u015fini g\u00f6rmeyi ya da bir i\u015flemini yapmay\u0131 bor\u00e7lan\u0131rken, vek\u00e2let veren de onun yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 giderleri ve verdi\u011fi avanslar\u0131 \u00f6demeyi bor\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan vek\u00e2let iki tarafl\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmedir. Temsil yetkisi ise tek tarafl\u0131 bir hukuki i\u015flemdir. Genel olarak vek\u00e2let, vekil ile vekil eden aras\u0131ndaki i\u00e7 ili\u015fkiyi, temsil ise vekil edenin vekil arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile i\u015flem yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile aras\u0131ndaki d\u0131\u015f ili\u015fkiyi ifade eder.
\n5. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu’nun temsil ve vek\u00e2let ili\u015fkisini d\u00fczenleyen h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcvenine dayan\u0131r. Vekilin bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7o\u011fu bu g\u00fcven unsurundan, di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve onun iradesine uygun davranma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011far. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fini g\u00f6rmeye ili\u015fkin bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme oldu\u011fundan esas itibariyle i\u015fin m\u00fcvekkilin menfaatine yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu durum i\u015f g\u00f6rme s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin do\u011fal bir sonucudur.<\/p>\n
6. Nitekim 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’da sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vek\u00e2let verene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve \u201c\u015eahsen ifa, sadakat ve \u00f6zen g\u00f6sterme\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan 506 nc\u0131 maddesinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Sadakat borcu kavram\u0131, vekilin gerek vek\u00e2letin ifas\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda gerekse sonras\u0131nda kendisine duyulan g\u00fcvene uygun olarak m\u00fcvekkilinin menfaatlerini s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile g\u00fcd\u00fclen ama\u00e7 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde koruma ve kendi menfaatini m\u00fcvekkilinkine t\u00e2bi k\u0131lma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ifade eder. Vekilin i\u015f g\u00f6rme ile hedeflenen sonucun ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olmas\u0131 i\u00e7in hayat deneylerine ve i\u015flerin normal ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6re gerekli giri\u015fim ve davran\u0131\u015flarda bulunmas\u0131, ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 sonucu engelleyebilecek davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nmas\u0131 ise \u00f6zen borcunun konusunu olu\u015fturur. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanlarda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r. Bu nedenle vekil \u00fczerine ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fi ifa ederken ayn\u0131 \u015fartlar alt\u0131nda i\u015f g\u00f6ren basiretli, \u00f6zenli bir vekil gibi hareket etmelidir.<\/p>\n
8. Yukar\u0131daki h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca vekilin, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131nda olaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Vek\u00e2letin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 504 \u00fcnc\u00fc maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vek\u00e2letin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur.<\/p>\n
9. Vekil bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmedi\u011fi, \u00f6zellikle vek\u00e2leti kasten vekil edenin zarar\u0131na, kendisinin veya ba\u015fka birinin yarar\u0131na kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla b\u00f6yle bir durumda vekil eden zararland\u0131r\u0131l\u0131rken, vekil \u00e7ok zaman kendisine veya ba\u015fka bir kimseye \u00e7\u0131kar sa\u011flamaktad\u0131r. Oysa ki, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunun temel amac\u0131 ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na i\u015f g\u00f6ren kimsenin yetkisini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanma riskini \u00f6nlemektir. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, g\u00fcven esas\u0131na dayal\u0131 bir i\u015f g\u00f6rme edimi ihtiva etti\u011finden bu g\u00fcvenin korunmas\u0131 her \u015feyden \u00f6nce 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 506 nc\u0131 maddesinin bir gere\u011fi oldu\u011fu gibi 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 2 nci maddesinde ifadesini bulan d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n da bir gere\u011fidir.<\/p>\n
10. Uygulamada vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 durumlar\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zellikle vekilin satmakla yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferine nazaran \u00e7ok d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bir bedelle satarak devretti\u011fi h\u00e2llerde yo\u011funla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Ancak, Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 19.12.2019 tarihli ve 2017\/1-1272 Esas, 2019\/1399 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6zard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. Vekilin, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde belirtilen yetkilerin d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131, vekil edenin talimat\u0131na uygun hareket etmemesi ve onun yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapmas\u0131 durumunda de\u011finilen maddeler uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. Di\u011fer taraftan vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde vekilin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemlerin vek\u00e2let veren a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olup olmayaca\u011f\u0131 sorunu ile de kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131l\u0131r. Bu durumda, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 3 \u00fcnc\u00fc maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyiniyetli ise yani vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar. Vekil, vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vek\u00e2let eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz.<\/p>\n
12. Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli olup vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa, vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 2 nci maddesindeki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir. S\u00f6z konusu Kanun maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan h\u00e2kim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fcniyeti te\u015fvik etmek, en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahk\u00fbm edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler de bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 07.12.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/14-609 Esas, 2011\/744 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131).<\/p>\n
13. Vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revi k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve vekille s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi vekil ile el ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya en az\u0131ndan vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor yahut bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil eden, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshini, bu ba\u011flamda s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye g\u00f6re tapuda intikal yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa tapunun iptalini her zaman isteyebilir.<\/p>\n
14. Di\u011fer taraftan h\u00e2kim, taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu olan vak\u0131alar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini kural olarak kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131ramaz. Bir olay\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini taraflar ispat etmelidir. Bir davada ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn hangi tarafa ait olaca\u011f\u0131 konusu 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un \u201c\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6 nc\u0131 maddesinde \u201cKanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr” \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 190 \u0131nc\u0131 maddesine g\u00f6re de \u201c\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, kanunda \u00f6zel bir d\u00fczenleme bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, iddia edilen vak\u0131aya ba\u011flanan hukuki sonu\u00e7tan kendi lehine hak \u00e7\u0131karan tarafa aittir. Kanuni bir karineye dayanan taraf, sadece karinenin temelini olu\u015fturan vak\u0131aya ili\u015fkin ispat y\u00fck\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf, kanuni karinenin aksini ispat edebilir\u201d. A\u00e7\u0131klanan bu genel h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn bu iddiay\u0131 ileri s\u00fcren davac\u0131 tarafa ait olaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
15. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kapsam\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; dava konusu Samsun ili, Atakum il\u00e7esi, Alanl\u0131 Mahallesi 3850 ada 8 parseldeki 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm davac\u0131n\u0131n miras b\u0131rakan\u0131 … ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iken \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc \u00fczerine17.04.2019 tarihinde miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 ad\u0131na intikal etti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn al\u0131m yetkisini i\u00e7erir Samsun 5. Noterli\u011finin 31.07.2019 tarihli ve 13239 yevmiye numaral\u0131 vek\u00e2letnamesi ile daval\u0131 …\u2019y\u0131 vekil tayin etti\u011fi, daval\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n da vekil s\u0131fat\u0131yla ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131n paylar\u0131n\u0131 01.08.2019 tarihinde davac\u0131 ad\u0131na sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu \u015fekilde davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tamam\u0131na malik oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
16. Davac\u0131, Samsun 5. Noterli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen 31.07.2019 tarihli ve 13238 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 ve ayn\u0131 noterli\u011fin 05.08.2019 tarihli ve 13486 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fczeltme beyannamesiyle miras b\u0131rakan\u0131 …\u2019den ad\u0131na intikal eden dava konusu 3850 ada 8 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcmdeki hak ve hisselerinin tamam\u0131n\u0131 diledi\u011fi bedel ve \u015fartlarda diledi\u011fi ki\u015fiye satmas\u0131 ve gerekli ba\u015fka i\u015flemleri yapmas\u0131 i\u00e7in daval\u0131 …’\u0131 vekil tayin etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Daval\u0131 …\u2019n\u0131n da davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 18 No.lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc 05.08.2019 tarihinde di\u011fer daval\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi konumundaki \u0130skender Cebeciye 179.681,20 TL bedelle satt\u0131\u011f\u0131, dosya i\u00e7erisinde yer alan bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn de\u011ferinin dava ve devir tarihi itibariyle 306.000,00 TL oldu\u011funun belirtildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 …\u2019y\u0131 07.08.2019 tarihinde vekillikten azletti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
18. Dosya i\u00e7erisinde yer alan belgeler, tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 ve taraf beyanlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda daval\u0131lar\u0131n \u00f6ncesinde birbirlerini tan\u0131d\u0131klar\u0131 ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz al\u0131m sat\u0131m\u0131ndan kaynaklanan akdi ili\u015fkilerinin bulundu\u011fu, daval\u0131 …’in bu akdi ili\u015fkiden dolay\u0131 di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’dan alacakl\u0131 oldu\u011funu savundu\u011fu, bu alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 tahsil etmek i\u00e7in dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc alaca\u011f\u0131na mahsuben devrald\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
19. Daval\u0131 …’n\u0131n, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi olan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’e olan borcuna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc vek\u00e2leten esasen bedelsiz oldu\u011fu h\u00e2lde sat\u0131\u015f g\u00f6stermek suretiyle vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanarak devretti\u011fi, bu \u015fekilde vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zetmedi\u011fi ve sadakat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131 davrand\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 …’in de vekile ait olmayan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131, m\u00fclk sahibi vek\u00e2let verenle ilgisi bulunmayan, vekilden olan \u015fahsi alaca\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k mahsupla\u015fmak suretiyle edindi\u011fini bildi\u011fi, daval\u0131 …’in dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm i\u00e7in vekil olan di\u011fer daval\u0131 …’ya bedel \u00f6demedi\u011fi, bu durumda iyiniyetli olarak kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile vekilin \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde birlikte hareket ettiklerinin kabul\u00fc gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
20. O h\u00e2lde; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncelikli talebi olan tapu iptali ve tescil isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde verilen direnme karar\u0131 yerindedir.<\/p>\n
21. Ne var ki \u00d6zel Dairece, daval\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden inceleme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan dosya \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmelidir.<\/p>\n
VII. KARAR
\nA\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeplerle;
\nDirenme karar\u0131 yerinde olup, daval\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden inceleme yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere dosyan\u0131n YARGITAY 1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130NE G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
23.10.2024 tarihinde oy birli\u011fiyle kesin olarak karar verildi.
\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u200bYarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu’nun 23\/10\/2024 tarihli\u00a02023\/292 Esas, 2024\/531 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu 2023\/292 E., 2024\/531 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 : Samsun B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 1. Hukuk Dairesi SAYISI : 2022\/2559 E., 2022\/2905 K. KARAR : Davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne \u00d6ZEL DA\u0130RE KARARI: Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 24.03.2022 tarihli ve 2021\/2552 Esas, 2022\/2422 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 BOZMA karar\u0131 Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki tapu iptali ve tescil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde alacak davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kabul\u00fcne, daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince verilen karar\u0131n davac\u0131 vekili ile daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince istinaf ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonunda bozulmu\u015f, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnilmi\u015ftir. Direnme karar\u0131 daval\u0131 … vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan g\u00fcndem ve dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: I. DAVA Davac\u0131 vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde; m\u00fcvekkilinin miras b\u0131rakan\u0131 olan babas\u0131n\u0131n payda\u015f\u0131 oldu\u011fu dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 Samsun ili, Atakum il\u00e7esi, Alanl\u0131 Mahallesi 3850 ada 7 …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-56628","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n