T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
7. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2022\/5054 E., 2023\/1370 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
\u0130NCELENEN KARARIN
\nMAHKEMES\u0130 :Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131nda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinde g\u00f6r\u00fclen miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131nda verilen karar hakk\u0131nda yap\u0131lan temyiz incelemesi sonucunda; Yarg\u0131tay 8. Hukuk Dairesince, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince bozmaya uyularak yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda; davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131lar vekili, daval\u0131 … vekili ve daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fma istemli temyiz edilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 07.03.2023 tarihinde duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ve duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fcn taraflara davetiye ile bildirilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Belli edilen g\u00fcnde davac\u0131lar vekili Av. … geldi. Ba\u015fka gelen olmad\u0131. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra a\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fman\u0131n bitti\u011fi bildirildi. \u0130\u015f karara b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131. Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
I. DAVA
\n1. Davac\u0131lar vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; taraflar\u0131n 26.02.2008 tarihinde bir araya gelerek “protokol” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlediklerini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye g\u00f6re 321 parselin tamam\u0131 ve 275 parselden 7000 m2 davac\u0131 …’a, 275 parselden 15.000 m\u00b2nin davac\u0131 …’a, 275 parselden 14.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’ye, 308 parselden 10.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’a, 308 parselden 18.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’a, 276 parselden 14.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’na, 276 parselden 15.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’a ait oldu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131klayarak, taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde belirtilen \u015fekilde tapular\u0131n iptali ile davac\u0131lar ad\u0131na tesciline, ifraz\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmamas\u0131 halinde ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n genel y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fcne oranlanmas\u0131 sonucu bulunacak hisselerin adlar\u0131na tesciline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. 14.03.2013 havale tarihli dilek\u00e7esinde ise; 275 parsel y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davaya alacak davas\u0131 olarak s\u00fcrd\u00fcrd\u00fcklerini ileri s\u00fcrerek, 41.012.00 TL’nin daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Birle\u015ftirilen … Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi 2018\/216 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dava dosyas\u0131nda daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davac\u0131 … vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; dava konusu 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 55.000 m\u00b2 oldu\u011funu, davac\u0131ya ise taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde 16.114 m\u00b2 yer verildi\u011fini ve tescil edildi\u011fini, ancak dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazda m\u0131ras\u00e7\u0131larca taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde payla\u015f\u0131lmayan 7.886 m\u00b2’nin a\u00e7\u0131kta kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve payla\u015f\u0131lmayan bu k\u0131s\u0131m y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kendisine miras pay\u0131 oran\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015fecek 2.697,18 m\u00b2’nin verilmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle tapu iptali ve tescile karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. CEVAP
\nDaval\u0131 … cevap dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; davan\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131lar\u0131n davalar\u0131nda haks\u0131z oldu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131klayarak davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARI
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin 02.04.2013 tarihli ve 2012\/1 Esas, 2013\/185 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul, k\u0131smen reddi ile 275 parsele ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131lan bedel davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile 42.000,00 TL’nin daval\u0131dan dava tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek yasal faizi ile tahsili ile 15.000,00 TL’sinin davac\u0131 …’a, 14.000,00 TL’sini davac\u0131 …’ye, 7.000,00 TL’sinin …’a verilmesine, 308 parselle ilgili a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 308 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131 …’ \u0131n 1\/8 hisse oran\u0131nda tapusunun iptali ile 5000\/112552 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 9069\/112552 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline, fazlaya ili\u015fkin taleplerin reddine, 321 parsel y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 321 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131 …’\u0131n 1\/8 hisse oran\u0131nda tapusunun iptali ile 1\/8 oran\u0131nda … ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline, fazlaya ili\u015fkin taleplerin reddine, daval\u0131n\u0131n 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda maliki olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan 276 parsel y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. BOZMA VE BOZMADAN SONRAK\u0130 YARGILAMA S\u00dcREC\u0130
\nA. Bozma Karar\u0131
\n1. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin 02.04.2013 tarihli ve 2012\/1 Esas, 2013\/185 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde davac\u0131lar vekili ve daval\u0131 temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2. Yarg\u0131tay 8. Hukuk Dairesince 08.04.2015 tarihli ve 2014\/25901 Esas, 2015\/7942 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131nda; dosya kapsam\u0131na, dava evrak\u0131 ile yarg\u0131lama tutanaklar\u0131 i\u00e7eri\u011fine, deliller de\u011ferlendirilerek karar verildi\u011fine ve taktirde bir isabetsizlik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6re taraflar\u0131n bozma gerek\u00e7esi kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Davac\u0131lar vekilinin di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden; dava konusu 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ait tapu kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde; taraflar\u0131n ortak mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131 …. ad\u0131na tapulama nedeni ile 02.06.1983 tarihinde tapuya tescil edildi\u011fi, 12.06.2008 tarihinde miras\u00e7\u0131lar ad\u0131na intikal g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, 22.06.2012 tarihinde h\u00fckmen m\u00fclkiyet hisse oranlar\u0131nda d\u00fczeltme ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi ve yarg\u0131lama devam ederken daval\u0131n\u0131n 14.08.2012 tarihinde pay\u0131n\u0131 dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 3. ki\u015fiye satt\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmazda pay\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakta olup, bu husus mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu, bu durum kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda HMK’n\u0131n 125 inci (HUMK. m. 186) maddesi gere\u011fince davac\u0131lardan se\u00e7imlik hakk\u0131n\u0131n sorulmas\u0131, davalar\u0131n\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete y\u00f6nelttikleri takdirde 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131n\u0131n pay\u0131n\u0131 sat\u0131n alan maliklere davan\u0131n y\u00f6neltilmesi, taraf delillerinin toplanmas\u0131, tazminat (bedel) hakk\u0131n\u0131 se\u00e7meleri halinde davan\u0131n bulundu\u011fu haliyle y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi, ondan sonra t\u00fcm deliller birlikte de\u011ferlendirilerek sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken, se\u00e7imlik hak g\u00f6zden ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131larak, daval\u0131n\u0131n 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda malik olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7e yap\u0131larak davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Daval\u0131n\u0131n sair temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden; dosya i\u00e7eri\u011finden dava konusu 275 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz hakk\u0131nda; S\u00f6ke Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 05.08.2010 tarihli ve 2008\/646 Esas, 2010\/897 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerindeki ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f sureti ile giderilmesine karar verildi\u011fi, Yarg\u0131tay 6. Hukuk Dairesi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 08.03.2011 tarihli ve 2010\/12655 Esas, 2011\/2658 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile onanarak 08.03.2011 tarihinde kesinle\u015fti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6ke Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi (Sat\u0131\u015f Memurlu\u011fu) 2011\/10 say\u0131l\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f dosyas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde ise; dava konusu 275 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n hissedarlardan …, Kadir Ceylan ve … adlar\u0131na hisseleri oran\u0131nda Av. … K\u00fcc\u00fckceylan’a 09.02.2012 tarihli 2. a\u00e7\u0131k artt\u0131rmada 118.500,00 TL’ye ihale edildi\u011fi, ihaleye itiraz bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan sat\u0131\u015f i\u015fleminin 16.02.2012 tarihinde kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, bu parsel ve dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 857 parsel ile birlikte daval\u0131n\u0131n hissesine 14.640,00 TL alacak d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn belirtildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, hal b\u00f6yle olunca davac\u0131lar\u0131n hakl\u0131 olan iptal\/tescil talebi, yap\u0131lan bu sat\u0131\u015fla bedele d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden; dava konusu 275 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle daval\u0131n\u0131n hissesine d\u00fc\u015fen miktar \u00fczerinden paya d\u00fc\u015fen sat\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n\u0131n taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki payla\u015f\u0131m oran\u0131na g\u00f6re davac\u0131lara \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekirken, yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek 24.01.2013 tarihli ke\u015fif sonras\u0131nda ziraat bilirki\u015fi raporunda dava konusu 275 parsel hakk\u0131nda belirtilen de\u011fer \u00fczerinden belirlenen alaca\u011f\u0131n \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir gerek\u00e7eleri ile karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince Bozmaya Uyularak Verilen Karar
\n1. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi, yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131nda;<\/p>\n
2. 275 parsele ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131lan bedel davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile 14.640,00 TL’nin daval\u0131 …’dan dava tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek yasal faizi ile tahsili ile 6.099.881 TL’sinin davac\u0131 …’a, 5.693.293 TL’sinin davac\u0131 …’ye, 2.846,825 TL’sinin davac\u0131 …’a verilmesine,<\/p>\n
3. 308 parselle ilgili a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 308 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131 …’\u0131n 1\/8 hisse oran\u0131nda tapusunun iptali ile 5000\/112552 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 9069\/112552 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline, fazlaya ili\u015fkin taleplerin reddine,<\/p>\n
4. 321 parsel y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 321 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131 …’\u0131n 1\/8 hisse oran\u0131nda tapusunun iptali ile 1\/8 oran\u0131nda … ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline, fazlaya ili\u015fkin taleplerin reddine,<\/p>\n
5. Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile 211\/55000 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 5277\/55000 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 14755\/55000 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 15831\/55000 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na, 17006\/55000 payda davac\u0131 … ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline,<\/p>\n
6. Birle\u015ftirilen davan\u0131n davac\u0131s\u0131 … a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan taraf s\u0131fat\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan davan\u0131n reddine,<\/p>\n
7. Fazlaya ili\u015fkin taleplerin reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
V. TEMY\u0130Z
\nA. Temyiz Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde davac\u0131lar vekili, daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davac\u0131 … ile daval\u0131 … vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. Temyiz Sebepleri
\n1. Davac\u0131lar vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; dava konusu 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda davac\u0131 … K\u00fc\u00e7\u00fckceylan’a 2110\/55000 oran\u0131nda pay tescil edilmesi gerekirken, 211\/55000 oran\u0131nda pay tescil edilerek eksik pay tescil edildi\u011fini, daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan bir dava olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde daval\u0131 lehine pay tescil edilmesinin hatal\u0131 oldu\u011funu, davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ve birle\u015ftirilen davan\u0131n reddine karar verildi\u011fi halde davac\u0131lar lehine eksik vekalet \u00fccreti takdir edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131 temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. Daval\u0131 … vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; m\u00fcvekkilinin daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na h\u00fckmen tescil edilen 16.114 m2’lik yeri sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daha fazlas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir talebinin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n iyi niyetli 3. ki\u015fi konumunda bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n t\u00fcmden reddinin gerekti\u011fini, ayr\u0131ca mahkemece nisbi vekalet \u00fccreti takdirine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131 temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Daval\u0131 … vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; birle\u015ftirilen davalar\u0131n\u0131n karar ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilmedi\u011fini, mahkemece al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi raporuna g\u00f6re 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 55.000 m\u00b2 olmas\u0131 nedeniyle taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine g\u00f6re daval\u0131 …’a d\u00fc\u015fecek k\u0131sm\u0131n 16.114 m\u00b2 de\u011fil 18.881,18 m\u00b2 olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi, yine rapora g\u00f6re taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde payla\u015f\u0131lmayan 7.886 m\u00b2 bulundu\u011funun belirtilmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda birle\u015ftirilen davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesinin gerekti\u011fini, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir dava bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde taksim edilmeyen miktar oran\u0131nda Mehmet ad\u0131na tescil karar\u0131 verilmesinin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 nitekim bu a\u00e7\u0131kta kalan k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n k\u00f6k miras\u00e7\u0131 … ad\u0131na tescil edilmesinin gerekti\u011fini, 275 parsel i\u00e7in bilirki\u015fi raporunun yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu, taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde davac\u0131 …’a 15.000 m2 yer verilmesine ra\u011fmen bilirki\u015filerin 17.000 m2 yer \u00fczerinden hesaplama yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, 275 parselin sat\u0131\u015f\u0131ndan gelen bedelin yanl\u0131\u015f hesapland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin i\u00e7inde 587 parselin de bedelinin bulundu\u011funu, bu miktar d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmeden hesap yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ayr\u0131ca mahkemece nisbi vekalet \u00fccreti takdirine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131 temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
C. Gerek\u00e7e
\n1. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ve Hukuki Nitelendirme
\nUyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130lgili Hukuk
\n1. MK m. 677\/1 inci maddesi gere\u011fince, terekenin tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
2. Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 tarihten itibaren ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131na sahiptirler. Alacakl\u0131, yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayanarak, s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011finin yerine getirilmesini miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devredenden isteyebilir ve ona kar\u015f\u0131 davay\u0131 a\u00e7abilir. (TMK.m.677\/1 f\u0131kra). Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine tabi olmas\u0131, bu iste\u011fe engel olu\u015fturmaz.<\/p>\n
3. De\u011ferlendirme
\n1. Taraflar\u0131n iddia, savunma ve dayand\u0131klar\u0131 belgelere, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hukuki nitelendirilmesi ile uygulanmas\u0131 gereken hukuk kurallar\u0131na, dava \u015fartlar\u0131na, yarg\u0131lamaya h\u00e2kim olan ilkelere, ispat kurallar\u0131na ve temyiz olunan kararda belirtilen gerek\u00e7elere g\u00f6re taraflar\u0131n vekalet \u00fccreti ile dava konusu 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza y\u00f6nelik temyiz itirazlar\u0131 kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. Dosyan\u0131n incelenmesinde dava konusu Kisir K\u00f6y\u00fc 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 55.000,00 m\u00b2 y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmazda yap\u0131lan 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 22\/A maddesi kadastro \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 neticesinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 10.01.2023 tarihinde 102 ada 35 parsel olarak 53.978,59 m\u00b2 olarak tescil edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu suretle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fti\u011finden taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki payla\u015f\u0131m oran\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmak suretiyle ve gerekti\u011finde bilirki\u015fiden rapor al\u0131nmak suretiyle paylar\u0131n yeniden hesaplanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
3. Bunun yan\u0131nda daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131 …’\u0131n dava konusu 276 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazla ilgili olarak miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde payla\u015f\u0131ma konu edilmeyen k\u0131sma y\u00f6nelik a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 birle\u015ftirilen S\u00f6ke 1. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2018\/216 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 davadan dolay\u0131 taraf s\u0131fat\u0131 bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
VI. KARAR
\nA\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeplerle;
\n1. Yukar\u0131da (1) numaral\u0131 paragrafta a\u00e7\u0131klanan taraflar\u0131n sair temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
2. (2,3) No.lu paragraflarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, davac\u0131lar vekili, daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131 … ile daval\u0131 … vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n
3. Bozma gerek\u00e7esine g\u00f6re davac\u0131lar vekili, daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131 … ile daval\u0131 … vekilinin vekalet \u00fccretine ili\u015fkin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesine \u015fimdilik yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na,<\/p>\n
4. Yarg\u0131tay duru\u015fma vekalet \u00fccreti olan 8.400,00 TL’nin daval\u0131lardan al\u0131narak davac\u0131lara verilmesine,<\/p>\n
5. Pe\u015fin yat\u0131r\u0131lan harc\u0131n istek halinde yat\u0131rana iadesine,<\/p>\n
6. Karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere,<\/p>\n
07.03.2023 tarihinde oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
7. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2021\/7657 E., 2023\/319 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
\u0130NCELENEN KARARIN
\nMAHKEMES\u0130 :Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131lar aleyhine 28.04.2003 tarihinde verilen dilek\u00e7eyle miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil talep edilmesi \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan duru\u015fma sonunda; davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne dair verilen 08.07.2004 tarihli karar\u0131n daval\u0131 … (….) vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra dosya ve i\u00e7eri\u011findeki t\u00fcm ka\u011f\u0131tlar incelenerek gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
I. DAVA
\nDavac\u0131 vekili, taraflar\u0131n mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131 …’\u0131n 06.07.1986’da vefat etti\u011fini, daval\u0131lardan …’nin daha \u00f6nce aralar\u0131nda d\u00fczenledikleri 12.03.1987 tarihli sat\u0131\u015f senedi ile t\u00fcm miras hakk\u0131n\u0131 davac\u0131ya bedelini alarak devretti\u011fi halde hi\u00e7 bir sat\u0131\u015f yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f gibi miras\u0131n payla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etti\u011fini, bu nedenle muris ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 bulunan 178, 187, 629, 682, 692, 760, 762, 768, 772, 1146, 1447, 509, 524, 775 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda daval\u0131n\u0131n miras hissesinin iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t ve tesciline karar verilmesini talep istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. CEVAP
\nDaval\u0131lardan … ile dahili daval\u0131lardan … yarg\u0131lamaya kat\u0131larak a\u00e7\u0131lan davay\u0131 kabul ettiklerini beyan etmi\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 … (Ekici) vekili davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARI
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131 ile daval\u0131 … ‘\u0131n mirasb\u0131rakandan intikal edecek ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardaki hissesini taraflar aras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesiyle di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131 davac\u0131ya satarak bedelini nakden ve tamamen ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, TMK’n\u0131n 677. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince bu sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zlemesinin ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardan 1146 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ifraz edilerek dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle 1146 parsele y\u00f6nelik davan\u0131n reddine, di\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. TEMY\u0130Z
\nA. Temyiz Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde daval\u0131 … Ekici vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. Temyiz Sebepleri
\nDaval\u0131 … vekili, s\u00f6zle\u015fmedeki imzan\u0131n daval\u0131ya ait olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda inceleme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n ve ke\u015fifte dinlenilen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, payla\u015f\u0131mda ba\u015fka miras\u00e7\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ya da sat\u0131\u015fa konu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilen ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar hakk\u0131nda da kabul karar\u0131 verildi\u011fini belirterek h\u00fckm\u00fcn kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
C. Gerek\u00e7e
\n1. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ve Hukuki Nitelendirme
\nUyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n eksik incelemeye ve hatal\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeye dayal\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130lgili Hukuk
\n4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) ilgili maddeleri \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“I. Payla\u015fma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi
\nMadde 676. (Eski 611 Md) Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda paylar\u0131n olu\u015fturulmas\u0131 ve fiilen al\u0131nmas\u0131 veya aralar\u0131nda yapacaklar\u0131 payla\u015fma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 ba\u011flar. Payla\u015fma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesiyle miras\u00e7\u0131lar, tereke mallar\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerindeki elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin miras paylar\u0131 oran\u0131nda payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesini de kabul edebilirler. Payla\u015fma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
II. Miras pay\u0131 \u00fczerinde s\u00f6zle\u015fme
\nMadde 677- Terekenin tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiyle yapaca\u011f\u0131 b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi, noterlik\u00e7e d\u00fczenlenmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme bu ki\u015fiye payla\u015fmaya kat\u0131lma yetkisi vermez; sadece payla\u015fma sonunda miras\u00e7\u0131ya \u00f6zg\u00fclenen pay\u0131n kendisine verilmesini isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flar.<\/p>\n
III. Miras\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler
\nMadde 678-Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131lmas\u0131 veya izni olmaks\u0131z\u0131n bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f bir miras hakk\u0131nda di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile yapaca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir.
\nB\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011fince yerine getirilmi\u015f olan edimlerin geri verilmesi istenebilir.\u201d<\/p>\n
3. De\u011ferlendirme
\n1. 12.03.1987 tarihli miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde elbirli\u011fi maliklerinden daval\u0131 … Ekici’nin miras pay\u0131n\u0131 davac\u0131ya satt\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Davada da bu sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayan\u0131larak tapu iptali ve tescil istemi bulundu\u011fundan di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n davada taraf s\u0131fat\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu ki\u015filer y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n pasif husumet yoklu\u011fundan reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
2. 12.03.1987 tarihli miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine y\u00f6nelik daval\u0131 …’nin bir itiraz\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak s\u00f6zle\u015fme kapsam\u0131nda sat\u0131\u015fa konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131yla g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece senette sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilen ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n tam ve denetime elveri\u015fli olacak \u015fekilde belirlenmemesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
3. O halde mahkemece, mahalli bilirki\u015filer ve tan\u0131klar\u0131n da haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu ke\u015fifte s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 okunmak suretiyle hangi parsellere isabet etti\u011finin tespiti sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n fen- harita bilirki\u015fisinin denetime elveri\u015fli raporunda i\u015faretlettirilmesi, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara ait tapu kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n ilgili tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden getirtilerek miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devretti\u011fi s\u00f6ylenilen daval\u0131 …’nin pay\u0131n\u0131n olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n denetlenmesi, pay\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde miktar\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilerek h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekir. Eksik ara\u015ft\u0131rmayla h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
V. KARAR
\nYukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle h\u00fckm\u00fcn BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n
Pe\u015fin yat\u0131r\u0131lan harc\u0131n yat\u0131rana iadesine,<\/p>\n
Karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere,<\/p>\n
19.01.2023 tarihinde oy birli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
14. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2020\/1506 E., 2020\/4337 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 :Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131lar aleyhine 06\/02\/2008 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde verilen dilek\u00e7e ile tapu iptali ve tescil talebi \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan duru\u015fma sonunda; davan\u0131n reddine dair verilen 16\/09\/2015 g\u00fcnl\u00fc h\u00fckm\u00fcn Yarg\u0131tayca incelenmesi davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenilmekle s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra dosya ve i\u00e7erisindeki b\u00fct\u00fcn ka\u011f\u0131tlar incelenerek gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
K A R A R<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili; m\u00fcvekkilinin, daval\u0131lar … ve … ile ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelere g\u00f6re; daval\u0131lar\u0131n 58, 59, 78 ve 88 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda murisleri … ve …’den intikal edecek hisselerini sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, zilyetli\u011fi teslim ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak tapuda devir i\u015flemlerinin yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en murislerden daval\u0131lara intikal edecek hisselerin iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131t ve tesciline, bu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda muris …’dan muris …’e intikal eden hisselerden daval\u0131lara intikal edecek hisselerin tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131t ve tesciline karar verilmesi talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131lardan … ile dahili daval\u0131lardan …, … ve … davaya konu sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemini kabul ettiklerini beyan etmi\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fc, davac\u0131 vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir.
\nMiras\u00e7\u0131lar miras yoluyla kendilerine intikal eden haklar\u0131 ister di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara isterse miras\u00e7\u0131 olmayan ki\u015filere bedelli ya da bedelsiz olarak devredebilirler.<\/p>\n
TMK m. 677\/1 maddesi gere\u011fince, terekenin tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 tarihten itibaren ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131na sahiptirler. Alacakl\u0131, yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayanarak, s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011finin yerine getirilmesini miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devredenden isteyebilir ve ona kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7abilir. (TMK.m.677\/1.f\u0131kra). Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine tabi olmas\u0131, bu iste\u011fe engel olu\u015fturmaz. Yaln\u0131zca, miras\u00e7\u0131lar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere yap\u0131lan miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri TMK.nun 677\/2. (743 say\u0131l\u0131 TKM.nun 612\/2 ve 3. c\u00fcmleleri) madde ve f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrmedik\u00e7e (yani i\u015ftirak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmedik\u00e7e) \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin istekte bulunma olana\u011f\u0131 yoktur. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc i\u015ftirak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmedik\u00e7e s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131 ile daval\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde yap\u0131lan 19.11.2007 ve 15.01.2008 tarihli s\u00f6zle\u015fmelere g\u00f6re daval\u0131lar … ve …’un 58, 59, 78 ve 88 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda murisleri … ve …’den intikal eden hisselerini di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lardan davac\u0131ya satt\u0131klar\u0131, bedelini ald\u0131klar\u0131, taraflar\u0131n muris …’\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 oldu\u011fu, miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu ve s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011finin yerine getirilmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devrine ili\u015fkin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 tarihte ifa olana\u011f\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fundan mahkemece daval\u0131lar\u0131n kabul beyanlar\u0131 da g\u00f6zetilerek bir karar verilmesi gerekirken davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu nedenle bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7: Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, davac\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn BOZULMASINA, pe\u015fin yat\u0131r\u0131lan harc\u0131n yat\u0131ranlara iadesine, karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere, 02.07.2020 tarihinde oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
14. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2017\/2476 E., 2021\/1113 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 :Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131lar aleyhine 21.06.2013 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde verilen dilek\u00e7e ile miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden kaynaklanan alacak talebi \u00fczerine bozma ilam\u0131na uyularak yap\u0131lan duru\u015fma sonunda; davan\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle reddine dair verilen 13.06.2016 g\u00fcnl\u00fc h\u00fckm\u00fcn Yarg\u0131tayca incelenmesi davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenilmekle s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra dosya ve i\u00e7erisindeki b\u00fct\u00fcn ka\u011f\u0131tlar incelenerek gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
K A R A R<\/p>\n
Dava, miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden kaynaklanan alacak istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili, 103 ada 44, 45 ve 56 say\u0131l\u0131 parselde kay\u0131tl\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n, davac\u0131 m\u00fcvekkili taraf\u0131ndan bedeli noterden yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile kendilerine \u00f6denmek sureti ile daval\u0131 karde\u015flerinden sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bir araya gelemediklerinden tapuda devir ve intikal i\u015flemlerini yapt\u0131ramad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131lar … ve …’\u0131n … 7. Noterli\u011finde d\u00fczenlenen 19 A\u011fustos 1997 tarih ve 68060 ve 68061 yevmiye numaral\u0131 \u2018Muvafakatname ve Taahh\u00fctname\u2019 ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 resmi senetlerle muris babalar\u0131 …’den kalan hak ve hissesinin tamam\u0131n\u0131 m\u00fcvekkiline devrettiklerini, daval\u0131 …’\u0131n muris babalar\u0131 …’den kalan hak ve hissesini adi yaz\u0131l\u0131 senet ile m\u00fcvekkiline devretti\u011fini, daval\u0131 …\u2019in ise s\u00f6zl\u00fc olarak davac\u0131ya miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devretti\u011fini, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n 15 y\u0131ld\u0131r m\u00fcvekkilinin zilyetli\u011finde oldu\u011funu, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Karayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan kamula\u015ft\u0131r\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fclkiyetlerinin hazineye ge\u00e7ece\u011fini, \u00f6ncelikle kamula\u015ft\u0131rma bedelleri \u00fczerine tedbir konulmas\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilinin \u00f6demi\u015f oldu\u011fu bedellerin, dava tarihi itibariyle rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferinin hesaplanarak m\u00fcvekkiline geri \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesini talep ve dava etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar vekili; davan\u0131n \u00f6ncelikle zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de\u011ferlendirilmesini, a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n alacak davas\u0131 oldu\u011funu ve on y\u0131ll\u0131k zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin doldu\u011funu, m\u00fcvekkillerinden … hakk\u0131nda herhangi bir belge ibraz edilmedi\u011fini, di\u011fer m\u00fcvekkilleri hakk\u0131nda da ge\u00e7ersiz belgeler ibraz edildi\u011fini, bu nedenle davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece davan\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle reddine dair verilen ilk karar\u0131n davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Dairemizin 13.11.2015 tarih 2015\/2855 Esas, 2015\/10271 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 bozma ilam\u0131 ile \u2018Daval\u0131 …’nun k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 ve vasi atanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in K\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck\u00e7ekmece 2. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2013\/597 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 o\u011flu taraf\u0131ndan bildirilmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece, vasi tayinine ili\u015fkin dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131p a\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve daval\u0131 …’in k\u0131s\u0131tlan\u0131p k\u0131s\u0131tlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n ve davan\u0131n vasi huzuruyla g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi gerekip gerekmedi\u011fi tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmadan i\u015fin esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.\u2019 gerek\u00e7esiyle bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece Dairemizin bozma ilam\u0131na uyularak davan\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fc, davac\u0131 vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Miras\u00e7\u0131lar miras yoluyla kendilerine intikal eden haklar\u0131 ister di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara isterse miras\u00e7\u0131 olmayan ki\u015filere bedelli ya da bedelsiz olarak devredebilirler.<\/p>\n
T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 677\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince, terekenin tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 tarihten itibaren ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131na sahiptirler. Alacakl\u0131, yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayanarak, s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011finin yerine getirilmesini miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devredenden isteyebilir ve ona kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7abilir. Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine tabi olmas\u0131, bu iste\u011fe engel olu\u015fturmaz. Yaln\u0131zca, miras\u00e7\u0131lar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere yap\u0131lan miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri TMK\u2019nin 677\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrmedik\u00e7e (yani i\u015ftirak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmedik\u00e7e) \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin istekte bulunma olana\u011f\u0131 yoktur. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc i\u015ftirak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmedik\u00e7e s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00d6te yandan, TMK\u2019nin 678. maddesinde miras a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erli\u011fi mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 veya iznine tabi k\u0131l\u0131nm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131lmas\u0131 veya izni olmaks\u0131z\u0131n bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f bir miras hakk\u0131nda di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile yapaca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ge\u00e7erli kabul edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Somut olayda; TMK\u2019n\u0131n 677. maddesi gere\u011fince miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fundan daval\u0131 … ile davac\u0131 aras\u0131nda yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde akdedilmi\u015f bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme de bulunmamas\u0131na g\u00f6re davan\u0131n daval\u0131 … y\u00f6n\u00fcnden reddi do\u011fru ise de; miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, t\u00fcm terekenin payla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan itibaren ba\u015flayacakt\u0131r. Bu nedenle zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresi s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifa olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve payla\u015fman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarih itibar\u0131yla i\u015flemeye ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131ndan; somut olayda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz dolmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.
\nBu durumda mahkemece; \u00f6ncelikle kamula\u015ft\u0131rma dosyas\u0131n\u0131n getirtilmesi ve miras\u00e7\u0131lara \u00f6denen kamula\u015ft\u0131rma bedelinin tespit edilmesi, t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilerek daval\u0131 … d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki daval\u0131lara \u00f6denen bedelin davac\u0131ya \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekirken, davan\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle reddi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu nedenle bozulmas\u0131na karar vermek gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7: Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle davac\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn BOZULMASINA, pe\u015fin yat\u0131r\u0131lan harc\u0131n yat\u0131rana iadesine, karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere, 22.02.2021 tarihinde oy birli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/p>\n
2011\/14-408 E., 2011\/402 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : Beykoz 2.Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi
\nTAR\u0130H\u0130 : 22.12.2010
\nNUMARASI : 2010\/245 E-2010\/344 K.<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201ctapu iptal ve tescil\u201d davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda; Beykoz 2. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesince davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne dair verilen 02.11.2009 g\u00fcn ve 2007\/320 E-2009\/284 K say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n incelenmesinin daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenilmesi \u00fczerine, Yarg\u0131tay 14.Hukuk Dairesinin 22.03.2010 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/2431-3106 say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n
(\u201c…Dava, 14.09.2001 g\u00fcnl\u00fc adi yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f \u201cgayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 belgeye dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bi\u00e7im ko\u015fuluna uygun olarak d\u00fczenlenmedi\u011fini, davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece, dava kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fc, daval\u0131 temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Bor\u00e7lar Kanununda kural olarak s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin yap\u0131l\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir \u015fekle tabi tutulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten BK\u2019nun 11\/1.maddesi uyar\u0131nca \u201cakdin s\u0131hhati konusunda kanunda sarahat olmad\u0131k\u00e7a hi\u00e7bir \u015fekle tabi de\u011fildir\u201d. Fakat kanun taraflardan birinin veya her ikisinin bazen de \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin yahut kamunun menfaatini korumay\u0131, hukuki g\u00fcvenceyi sa\u011flamay\u0131 ama\u00e7lam\u0131\u015fsa \u015fekil zorunlulu\u011fu getirebilir. Kanun \u015fekli bazen ge\u00e7erlilik \u015fart\u0131, bazen de ispat \u015fart\u0131 olarak arar. \u015eayet \u015fekil, ge\u00e7erlilik (s\u0131hhat) \u015fart\u0131 olarak aranm\u0131\u015fsa bu \u015farta uyulmadan yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erli sonu\u00e7 meydana getirmeyece\u011finden ifas\u0131 istenemez.<\/p>\n
Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 213.maddesine g\u00f6re \u201cgayrimenkul sat\u0131m\u0131 muteber olmak i\u00e7in resmi senede raptedilmek \u015fartt\u0131r.\u201d Yasan\u0131n m.22\/1\u2019deki \u201cbir akdin ilerde in\u015fa edilmesine dair yap\u0131lan mukavele muteberdir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca e\u011fer kanun ileride yap\u0131lacak akdi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 k\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa (ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131) Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 22\/2.maddesinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u00fczere \u00f6n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin (ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin) de \u015fekle uyularak yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunludur. Di\u011fer taraftan 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Noterlik Kanununun noterlerin yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015fleri d\u00fczenleyen 60.maddesinin 3.f\u0131kras\u0131 ve gayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin \u201cd\u00fczenleme \u015fekilde yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131\u201d zorunlu k\u0131lan 89. maddesi ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini yapma g\u00f6revini noterlere vermi\u015ftir. Bir tan\u0131mlama yapmak gerekirse, noterde d\u00fczenlenen resmi senet; resmi bir memur taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanarak taraflar huzurunda okunup imzalanarak ve resmi memurca (noter taraf\u0131ndan) m\u00fch\u00fcr ve imza ile onaylanan s\u00f6zle\u015fmedir. 07.10.1953 tarihli ve 8\/7 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere resmi \u015fekilde maksat taraflar\u0131n hakiki iradelerini tam olarak g\u00f6revli memur huzurunda (noterde) beyan etmeleridir. Aksi halde yasan\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u015fekle uyulmadan yap\u0131lan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayan\u0131larak vaat alacakl\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan tescil isteminde bulunulamaz.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece yap\u0131lan bu saptamalara g\u00f6re davac\u0131n\u0131n tescil istemine ili\u015fkin talebin reddi, ikinci kademedeki iste\u011fin de\u011ferlendirilmesi yerine orta yerde bi\u00e7imine uygun d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme varm\u0131\u015f gibi tescil talebinin kabul\u00fc do\u011fru olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r…\u201d) gerek\u00e7esiyle bozularak dosya yerine geri \u00e7evrilmekle, yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda, mahkemece \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
TEMY\u0130Z EDEN : Daval\u0131 vekili<\/p>\n
HUKUK GENEL KURULU KARARI<\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulunca incelenerek direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcresinde temyiz edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131ktan ve dosyadaki ka\u011f\u0131tlar okunduktan sonra gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 vekili; davac\u0131 ile daval\u0131n\u0131n karde\u015f olduklar\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n annelerinden daval\u0131ya intikal edecek olan 40 parseldeki miras pay\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 10.000 YTL kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda davac\u0131ya satmay\u0131 vaad ve taahh\u00fct etti\u011fini, aralar\u0131nda 14.09.2001 tarihli s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131p sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin tamam\u0131n\u0131n da tahsil edildi\u011fini, ancak daval\u0131n\u0131n ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 karde\u015finin miras pay\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 ad\u0131na tesciline, aksi halde sat\u0131\u015f bedeli olan 10.000 YTL ile birlikte \u00f6deme tarihinden itibaren ge\u00e7erli olmak \u00fczere zarar ve ziyan\u0131n tespiti ve en y\u00fcksek banka faiz oran\u0131nda tahsiline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece; davac\u0131 ile daval\u0131n\u0131n karde\u015f olduklar\u0131, yap\u0131lan sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle adi \u015fekilde yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f vaadinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkilemeyece\u011fini MK 677\/1.maddesince bu durumun a\u00e7\u0131kca vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 , keza miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle tescili i\u00e7in i\u015ftirak halinin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesine de gerek bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ayr\u0131ca miras\u00e7\u0131 olarak sadece daval\u0131 ile davac\u0131n\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131 olduklar\u0131 ba\u015fka miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7eleri ile davac\u0131n\u0131n tescil talebinin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6zel Dairece; \u201c…yasan\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u015fekle uyulmadan yap\u0131lan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayan\u0131larak vaat alacakl\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan tescil isteminde bulunulamayaca\u011f\u0131; mahkemece, davac\u0131n\u0131n tescil istemine ili\u015fkin talebin reddi ile ikinci kademedeki iste\u011fin de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekirken, aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyle orta yerde bi\u00e7imine uygun d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme varm\u0131\u015f gibi tescil talebinin kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u201c gerek\u00e7esiyle, karar bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Yerel Mahkemece; \u00f6nceki gerek\u00e7eler tekrarlanarak direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, karde\u015f olan taraflar aras\u0131nda adi \u015fekilde d\u00fczenlenen gayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7erli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Hemen belirtilmelidir ki; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu (TMK)’nun;<\/p>\n
677.maddesinde:
\n\u201c…Terekenin tamam\u0131 veya bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde miras pay\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiyle yapaca\u011f\u0131 b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi, noterlik\u00e7e d\u00fczenlenmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme bu ki\u015fiye payla\u015fmaya kat\u0131lma yetkisi vermez; sadece payla\u015fma sonunda miras\u00e7\u0131ya \u00f6zg\u00fclenen pay\u0131n kendisine verilmesini isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flar.\u201d
\nh\u00fckm\u00fc yer almakta;<\/p>\n
678.maddesinde ise; \u201cmirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131lmas\u0131 veya izni olmaks\u0131z\u0131n bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f bir miras hakk\u0131nda di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile yapaca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir. B\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011fince yerine getirilmi\u015f olan edimlerin geri verilmesi istenebilir…\u201d
\ndenilmektedir.<\/p>\n
818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu(BK)\u2019nda kural olarak s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin yap\u0131l\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir \u015fekle tabi tutulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Kanun \u015fekli bazen ge\u00e7erlilik \u015fart\u0131, bazen de ispat \u015fart\u0131 olarak aramaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u015eayet \u015fekil, ge\u00e7erlilik (s\u0131hhat) \u015fart\u0131 olarak aranm\u0131\u015fsa bu \u015farta uyulmadan yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erli sonu\u00e7 meydana getirmeyece\u011finden ifas\u0131 istenemez.<\/p>\n
818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 213. maddesine g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
\u201cGayrimenkul sat\u0131m\u0131 muteber olmak i\u00e7in resmi senede raptedilmek \u015fartt\u0131r\u201d.
\nDi\u011fer taraftan, ayn\u0131 Kanunun \u201c Akit Yapmak Vaadi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 22.maddesinde:<\/p>\n
\u201cBir akdin ilerde in\u015fa edilmesine dair yap\u0131lan mukavele muteberdir.
\nKanun iki taraf\u0131n menfaatleri i\u00e7in bu akdin s\u0131hhatini bir nevi \u015fekle riayet etme\u011fe tabi k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde, bu \u015fekil o akdin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 taahh\u00fcd\u00fcne de tatbik olunur.\u201d<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Bu h\u00fckme g\u00f6re, bir akdin ilerde in\u015fa edilmesine dair yap\u0131lan mukavele muteber oldu\u011fundan, e\u011fer kanun ileride yap\u0131lacak akdi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 k\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa (ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131), maddenin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ifade edildi\u011fi \u00fczere \u00f6n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin (ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin) de \u015fekle uyularak yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n
Di\u011fer taraftan 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Noterlik Kanununun noterlerin yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015fleri d\u00fczenleyen 60.maddesinin 3.f\u0131kras\u0131 ve gayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin \u201cd\u00fczenleme \u015fekilde yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131\u201d zorunlu k\u0131lan 89.maddesi ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini yapma g\u00f6revini noterlere vermi\u015ftir.
\n07.10.1953 tarihli ve 8\/7 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere resmi \u015fekilden maksat taraflar\u0131n hakiki iradelerini tam olarak g\u00f6revli memur huzurunda (noterde) beyan etmeleridir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6yle ise, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin kanunun arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi \u015fekle uygun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ge\u00e7erlilik ko\u015fuludur.<\/p>\n
Somut olaya gelince;<\/p>\n
Karde\u015f olan taraflar aras\u0131nda 14.09.2001 tarihinde ( adi \u015fekilde ) gayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, miras b\u0131rakanlar\u0131n\u0131n ise 17.07.2002 tarihinde \u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, adiyen d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmede her iki taraf\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
Miras\u00e7\u0131 olan taraflar, hen\u00fcz do\u011fmam\u0131\u015f miras haklar\u0131n\u0131n devri konusunda s\u00f6zle\u015fme d\u00fczenlemi\u015fler ve sat\u0131\u015f vaadi oldu\u011funu belirtilmi\u015flerdir.
\nO halde, taraflar\u0131n iradesinin sat\u0131\u015f vaadi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi oldu\u011funda ku\u015fku yoktur.<\/p>\n
Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan d\u00fczenlemeler g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda taraflar aras\u0131ndaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131ndaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri d\u00fczenleyen TMK\u2019nun 677.maddesine g\u00f6re ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyebilme olana\u011f\u0131 yoktur. Ayn\u0131 \u201cKanunun Miras\u0131n A\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00d6nce Yap\u0131lan S\u00f6zle\u015fmelere\u201d ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7eren 678.maddesine g\u00f6re; mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131lmas\u0131 veya izni olmaks\u0131z\u0131n bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f bir miras hakk\u0131nda di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile yapaca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir.B\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011fince yerine getirilmi\u015f olan edimlerin geri verilmesi istenebilir. Buna g\u00f6re, adiyen d\u00fczenlenen s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ge\u00e7erli ise de, buna mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 yada izni aranm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Bir an i\u00e7in eldeki davaya konu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin TMK\u2019nun 678.maddesi kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclse dahi, bu halde de, murisin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve onay da vermedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, bu y\u00f6nden de ge\u00e7erli kabul edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n
O halde, mahkemece gerek yukar\u0131da ve gerekse bozma ilam\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klanan hususlar g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilerek ge\u00e7ersiz s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayal\u0131 tescil isteminin kabul edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
Bu nedenle, Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nca da yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilave nedenlerle benimsenen \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na uyulmak gerekirken, \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup; direnme karar\u0131 bozulmal\u0131d\u0131r. <\/p>\n
S O N U \u00c7 : Daval\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda yeralan nedenler yan\u0131nda, yukarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilave nedenlerden dolay\u0131 HUMK.nun 429.maddesi gere\u011fince BOZULMASINA, istek halinde temyiz pe\u015fin harc\u0131n\u0131n geri verilmesine, 08.06.2011 tarihinde, oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bMiras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 tarihten itibaren ifa (yerine getirme) olana\u011f\u0131na sahiptirler. Alacakl\u0131, yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayanarak, s\u00f6zle\u015fme gere\u011finin yerine getirilmesini miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devredenden isteyebilir ve ona kar\u015f\u0131 davay\u0131 a\u00e7abilir. (TMK.m.677\/1 f\u0131kra). Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine tabi olmas\u0131, bu iste\u011fe engel olu\u015fturmaz.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi 2022\/5054 E., 2023\/1370 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” \u0130NCELENEN KARARIN MAHKEMES\u0130 :Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi Taraflar aras\u0131nda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinde g\u00f6r\u00fclen miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131nda verilen karar hakk\u0131nda yap\u0131lan temyiz incelemesi sonucunda; Yarg\u0131tay 8. Hukuk Dairesince, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince bozmaya uyularak yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda; davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131lar vekili, daval\u0131 … vekili ve daval\u0131-birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fma istemli temyiz edilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 07.03.2023 tarihinde duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ve duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fcn taraflara davetiye ile bildirilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Belli edilen g\u00fcnde davac\u0131lar vekili Av. … geldi. Ba\u015fka gelen olmad\u0131. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra a\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fman\u0131n bitti\u011fi bildirildi. \u0130\u015f karara b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131. Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: I. DAVA 1. Davac\u0131lar vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; taraflar\u0131n 26.02.2008 tarihinde bir araya gelerek “protokol” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 miras taksim s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlediklerini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye g\u00f6re 321 parselin tamam\u0131 ve 275 parselden 7000 m2 davac\u0131 …’a, 275 parselden 15.000 m\u00b2nin davac\u0131 …’a, 275 parselden 14.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’ye, 308 parselden 10.000 m\u00b2 davac\u0131 …’a, 308 parselden 18.000 m\u00b2 …<\/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-88292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n