T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay<\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/p>\n
2017\/1291 E., 2021\/1412 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 :Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
1. Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201ctazminat\u201d davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda, \u00d6demi\u015f Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesince verilen davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin karar daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay (Kapat\u0131lan) 6. Hukuk Dairesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonunda bozulmu\u015f, Mahkemece \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. Direnme karar\u0131 daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Hukuk Genel Kurulunca dosyadaki belgeler incelendikten sonra gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
I. YARGILAMA S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 \u0130stemi:
\n4. Davac\u0131 vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde; daval\u0131 \u015firketin, m\u00fcvekkili \u015firkete ait olan H\u00fcrriyet Mah. 1697 Sok. No:72 adresinde bulunan okul binas\u0131n\u0131n sadece zemin kat\u0131n\u0131 (di\u011fer katlar\u0131 ba\u015fka bir kirac\u0131ya vermemek kayd\u0131yla) 01.09.2011 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli ve 10.09.2011 tarihinde tanzim edilen kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile 10 ayl\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yani e\u011fitim d\u00f6nemi sonuna kadar ana s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131 olarak ayl\u0131k 4.000TL+KDV olmak \u00fczere kiralad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 \u015firketin 10.10.2011 tarihinde, kira konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edece\u011fine dair \u201ctahliye taahh\u00fctnamesi\u201d imzalayarak m\u00fcvekkili \u015firkete verdi\u011fini, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edilmemesi \u00fczerine daval\u0131 aleyhine tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine dayal\u0131 icra takibi ba\u015flatt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n icra takibine itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine itiraz\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve tahliye davas\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, yarg\u0131lama neticesinde daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan tahliyesine karar verildi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n bu karar\u0131 temyiz etti\u011fini, daval\u0131 kirac\u0131ya \u00d6demi\u015f 1. Noterli\u011finin 29.05.2012 tarihli ve 4575 yevmiye numaral\u0131 ihtarname ke\u015fide edilerek \u201cKira konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde belirtti\u011fi tarihte tahliye etmesi, tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine g\u00fcvenilerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ayl\u0131k 13.000TL ve KDV\u2019si olmak \u00fczere 8 y\u0131ll\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fka birine kiraya verildi\u011fi, bu nedenle 30.06.2012 tarihinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye etmek i\u00e7in haz\u0131rl\u0131klara ba\u015flamas\u0131, aksi takdirde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan zararlardan ve aradaki kira fark\u0131ndan sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131\u201dn\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtildi\u011fini, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tahliye edilece\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi 30.06.2012 tarihinde kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin sona erdi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n kiralanan\u0131 zaman\u0131nda bo\u015falt\u0131p m\u00fcvekkiline teslim etmedi\u011fini ve m\u00fcvekkilinin b\u00fcy\u00fck zarar\u0131na sebebiyet verdi\u011fini, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ancak 13.02.2013 tarihinde m\u00fcvekkiline teslim edildi\u011fini, m\u00fcvekkilinin, daval\u0131 kirac\u0131n\u0131n tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine g\u00fcvenerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 zemin ve iki kat\u0131 ile birlikte 08.12.2011 d\u00fczenleme tarihli ve 01.07.2012 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile ayl\u0131k 13.000TL+KDV ile ba\u015fka birine kiraya verdi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n zaman\u0131nda tahliye etmemesi nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131ya teslim edilemedi\u011fini, yeni kirac\u0131 ile yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin 11. maddesi gere\u011fince 156.000TL+KDV olmak \u00fczere bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira bedelinin ikinci y\u0131l kiras\u0131na say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l i\u00e7in kira bedeline en az %10 uygulanacak olan kira bedeli art\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira ve kira art\u0131\u015f bedeli gelirinden yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde \u201c\u2026belirtilen g\u00fcnde gayrimenkul\u00fc tahliye etmedi\u011fim takdirde bundan do\u011facak her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hukuki sorumluluklara katlanmay\u0131 beyan ve taahh\u00fct ederim\u201d \u015feklinde beyanda bulunarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kacak zararlar\u0131 da kar\u015f\u0131layaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dedi\u011fi kira bedelleri d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fckten sonra m\u00fcvekkilinin kira gelirinden mahrum kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar\u0131n\u0131n 138.894TL oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek yoksun kal\u0131nan k\u00e2r olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan 138.894TL tazminat alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 30.06.2012 tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek ticari faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 Cevab\u0131:
\n5. Daval\u0131 vekili cevap dilek\u00e7esinde; m\u00fcvekkili \u015firketin kirac\u0131 olarak bulundu\u011fu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n t\u00fcm kira bedellerini yasal art\u0131\u015flar\u0131 ile birlikte tahliye etti\u011fi tarihe kadar \u00f6dedi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n kira alaca\u011f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ge\u00e7 tahliye edilmesi nedeniyle herhangi bir kira kayb\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde, \u201ctaraflar kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin feshi konusunda s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bitim tarihinden bir ay evvel yaz\u0131l\u0131 ihtarda bulunmad\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00fcrece kontrat yenilenmi\u015f kabul edilir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131 \u015firketin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bitiminden evvel ihtarda bulundu\u011funu ancak bir ayl\u0131k s\u00fcreye riayet etmedi\u011fini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin 23. maddesinde kiraya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn anaokulu olarak kullan\u0131lan zemin kat oldu\u011funun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtildi\u011fini ve kira s\u00fcresi i\u00e7erisinde kiraya verenin di\u011fer katlar\u0131 kiraya veremeyece\u011finin kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkili \u015firketin 01.06.2012 (do\u011frusu 01.07.2012) tarihinden sonra zemin kat d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki b\u00f6l\u00fcmler \u00fczerinde hi\u00e7bir hakk\u0131n\u0131n kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n isteseydi bu b\u00f6l\u00fcmleri rahatl\u0131kla tasarruf edebilece\u011fini, zemin kat d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki katlar\u0131n tasarrufu davac\u0131da olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen zemin kat\u0131n tahliye edilmemesi nedeniyle k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle t\u00fcm binan\u0131n kira bedelinin m\u00fcvekkilinden tahsil edilmesinin 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) 2. maddesine a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde ve tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde herhangi bir cezai \u015fart kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kabul etmemek kayd\u0131yla bir an i\u00e7in bir cezai \u015fart\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilse dahi, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 13.02.2013 tarihinde herhangi bir ihtiraz\u0131 kay\u0131t ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmeden teslim al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle m\u00fcvekkili \u015firket aleyhine tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131 \u015firketin tahliyeyi beklemeden \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcvekkilini ba\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Mahkeme Karar\u0131:
\n6. \u00d6demi\u015f Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 17.12.2013 tarihli ve 2013\/421 E., 2013\/1798 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile; daval\u0131 \u015firketin taahh\u00fct etti\u011fi tarihte kiralanan\u0131 bo\u015faltmamas\u0131 nedeniyle davac\u0131n\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131s\u0131 ile olan kira akdi dolay\u0131s\u0131yla belli miktar kazan\u00e7tan mahrum kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, 16.12.2013 tarihli bilirki\u015fi raporunda talep edilebilecek miktar\u0131n 138.850,85TL oldu\u011funun bildirildi\u011fi, rapordaki adi hesap hatas\u0131n\u0131n re’sen d\u00fczeltilmek suretiyle talep edilebilecek miktar\u0131n 139.020,34TL oldu\u011fu, bunun haricinde bilirki\u015fi bir tak\u0131m hukuk\u00ee m\u00fctalaalarda bulunmu\u015f ise de 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) ilgili h\u00fck\u00fcmleri gere\u011fince bilirki\u015finin bu beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n taraflar\u0131n\u0131n tacir olmas\u0131 ve davac\u0131n\u0131n talebinin a\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak 138.894TL’nin taahh\u00fct edilen tahliye tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek ticari faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131dan tazminine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6zel Daire Bozma Karar\u0131:
\n7. Mahkemenin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde daval\u0131 vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
8. Yarg\u0131tay (Kapat\u0131lan) 6. Hukuk Dairesinin 03.06.2014 tarihli ve 2014\/2794 E., 2014\/7241 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile; \u201c\u20261-Dosya kapsam\u0131na, toplanan delillere, mevcut deliller mahkemece takdir edilerek karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ve takdirde de bir isabetsizlik bulunmamas\u0131na g\u00f6re daval\u0131 vekilinin a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bendin kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
2-Davada dayan\u0131lan ve h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan 01.09.2011 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 30.06.2012 biti\u015f tarihli kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi konusunda taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k bulunmamaktad\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme ile davac\u0131ya ait okul binas\u0131n\u0131n zemin kat\u0131 anaokulu olarak kullan\u0131lmak \u00fczere daval\u0131ya kiraya verilmi\u015ftir. Kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 23.maddesinde; kiraya verenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dahil olmayan di\u011fer katlar\u0131 her ne ama\u00e7la olursa olsun ba\u015fkas\u0131na kiraya veremeyece\u011fi, bu katlar\u0131n kapal\u0131 tutulaca\u011f\u0131 kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Daval\u0131 kirac\u0131 10.01.2011 tarihinde imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde; kiralanan\u0131 en ge\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fme sonu olan 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye etmeyi taahh\u00fct etmi\u015f ve aksi durumda do\u011facak zararlardan sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131 ise okul binas\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 08.12.2011 tanzim 01.07.2012 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli ve 8 y\u0131l s\u00fcreli s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye kiraya vermi\u015ftir. Yeni kirac\u0131 ile yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmede zemin kat\u0131n 01.08.2012 tarihine kadar tahliyesinin sa\u011flanaca\u011f\u0131, aksi durumda s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ilk y\u0131la ait kira bedelinin al\u0131nmayaca\u011f\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l kira paras\u0131na art\u0131\u015f yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131 kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Daval\u0131 kiralanan\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan tahliye davas\u0131 sonucunda 13.02.2013 tarihinde tahliye etmi\u015f, bu nedenle kiralanan yeni kirac\u0131ya ge\u00e7 teslim edilmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131, kiralanan\u0131n taahh\u00fct edilen tarihte tahliye edilmemesi nedeniyle ilk y\u0131l\u0131n kira paras\u0131ndan yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l kiras\u0131n\u0131n ise art\u0131\u015fs\u0131z \u00f6denece\u011fini belirterek tazminat isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur. Mahkemece; tahliye tarihine kadar olan s\u00fcre\u00e7te daval\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dedi\u011fi kira paralar\u0131 mahsup edilmek suretiyle davac\u0131n\u0131n isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Kural olarak bir kimse taraf\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme nedeniyle bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na sokulamaz. Davac\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmede kiralanan\u0131n en ge\u00e7 01.08.2012 tarihinde yeni kirac\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131m\u0131na b\u0131rakmay\u0131 taahh\u00fct etmi\u015f aksi durumda bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira paras\u0131 yan\u0131nda ikinci y\u0131la ili\u015fkin kira paras\u0131na art\u0131\u015f uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye y\u00f6nelik taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirememesinin sebebi daval\u0131n\u0131n kiralanan\u0131 ge\u00e7 tahliye etmesidir. Kiralanan\u0131n ge\u00e7 tahliyesi nedeniyle olu\u015fan zarardan ilke olarak daval\u0131 sorumludur. Ancak, tazminat miktar\u0131 objektif k\u0131staslara g\u00f6re belirlenmelidir. Tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye y\u00f6nelik S\u00fcbjektif taahh\u00fctlerinin nazara al\u0131nmas\u0131 do\u011fru olmaz. Somut olaya bu \u00e7er\u00e7eveden bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde ge\u00e7 teslime ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira bedelinin al\u0131nmayaca\u011f\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l kira paras\u0131na art\u0131\u015f uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki taahh\u00fcd\u00fcne dayal\u0131 olarak tazminat hesab\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. Kiralanan\u0131n ge\u00e7 tahliye ve teslim edilmesinden kaynaklanan zarar\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n objektif \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlere g\u00f6re belirlenmesi gerekir. Bu kapsamda tazmini gereken zarar\u0131n kiralanan\u0131n tahliyesinin taahh\u00fct edildi\u011fi tarih ile tahliye edildi\u011fi tarihler aras\u0131ndaki s\u00fcre\u00e7te davac\u0131n\u0131n yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira geliri kadar oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir. Mahkemece bu y\u00f6nde hesaplama yap\u0131larak sonucuna g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekirken hukuksal dayana\u011f\u0131 olmayan gerek\u00e7e ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.\u201d gerek\u00e7esi ile karar bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Direnme Karar\u0131:
\n9. \u00d6demi\u015f Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 23.09.2014 tarihli ve 2014\/1066 E., 2014\/1329 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile; \u00f6nceki gerek\u00e7enin yan\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye y\u00f6nelik taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirememesinin sebebinin daval\u0131n\u0131n kiralanan\u0131 ge\u00e7 tahliye etmesi oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131n\u0131n, dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme uyar\u0131nca elde edece\u011fi kazan\u00e7tan mahrum kalm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle zarara u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tacir olan daval\u0131 basiretli bir i\u015f adam\u0131 gibi davranm\u0131\u015f olsayd\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n bozulan kararla h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nan miktar kadar zarar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131, kiralanan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n okul binas\u0131 olarak kiraya verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla e\u011fitim d\u00f6nemlerinde kiraya verilebilece\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Direnme Karar\u0131n\u0131n Temyizi:
\n10. Direnme karar\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. UYU\u015eMAZLIK<\/p>\n
11. Direnme yolu ile Hukuk Genel Kurulu \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; somut olayda, kiralanan\u0131n ge\u00e7 tahliye ve teslim edilmesinden kaynaklanan zarar\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n objektif \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlere g\u00f6re belirlenmesinin gerekip gerekmedi\u011fi, buradan var\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re tazmini gereken zarar\u0131n kiralanan\u0131n tahliyesinin taahh\u00fct edildi\u011fi tarih ile tahliye edildi\u011fi tarihler aras\u0131ndaki s\u00fcre\u00e7te davac\u0131n\u0131n yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira geliri kadar olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
III. GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
12. Bor\u00e7lar hukukuna egemen olan nispilik ilkesi gere\u011fince, bor\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi sadece ili\u015fkinin taraflar\u0131 aras\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7 do\u011furdu\u011fundan, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer s\u00f6z konusu ili\u015fkiye yabanc\u0131 kabul edilirler. Bu nedenle, hi\u00e7 kimse taraf\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir bor\u00e7 ili\u015fkisinden alacak hakk\u0131 kazanamaz ve taraf\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme nedeniyle bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na sokulamaz. Alacak hakk\u0131n\u0131n sahibi bor\u00e7 ili\u015fkisine taraf olarak alacakl\u0131 s\u0131fat\u0131na sahip olan ki\u015fidir. Talep, dava ve cebri icraya ba\u015fvurma haklar\u0131 da sadece ona aittir. Borcun y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcs\u00fc de bor\u00e7lu taraft\u0131r. Kural b\u00f6yle olmakla birlikte baz\u0131 istisnai durumlarda bor\u00e7 ili\u015fkisinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da etkili olmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
13. Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalardan sonra somut olaya gelindi\u011finde; taraflar aras\u0131nda 10.09.2011 tarihinde tanzim edilen 01.09.2011 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli ve 10 ay s\u00fcreli kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmeye g\u00f6re dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz 10 ayl\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yani e\u011fitim d\u00f6nemi sonuna kadar ana s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131 olarak kullan\u0131lmak \u00fczere ayl\u0131k 4.000,00TL+KDV bedelle daval\u0131ya kiralanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 9. maddesinde kira m\u00fcddeti bitti\u011fi h\u00e2lde kiralanan\u0131n bo\u015falt\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde kirac\u0131n\u0131n mal sahibinin bundan do\u011facak zarar ve ziyan\u0131n\u0131 tazmin edece\u011fi, \u201cHususi \u015eartlar\u201d b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn 23. maddesinde ise; kiraya verenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dahil olmayan di\u011fer katlar\u0131 her ne ama\u00e7la olursa olsun ba\u015fkas\u0131na kiraya veremeyece\u011fi, bu katlar\u0131n kapal\u0131 tutulaca\u011f\u0131 kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin d\u00fczenlenmesinden sonra daval\u0131 \u015firket, 10.10.2011 tarihli tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesi ile kira konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edece\u011fine dair taahh\u00fctte bulunmu\u015ftur. Daval\u0131 tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde \u201c\u2026Belirtilen g\u00fcnde gayrimenkul\u00fc tahliye etmedi\u011fim takdirde bundan do\u011facak her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hukuki sorumluluklara katlanmay\u0131 beyan ve taahh\u00fct ederim\u201d \u015feklinde beyanda bulunmu\u015ftur. Davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131 kirac\u0131ya \u00d6demi\u015f 1. Noterli\u011finin 29.05.2012 tarihli ve 4575 yevmiye numaral\u0131 ihtarname ke\u015fide edilerek kiralanan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesinde belirtilen tarihte tahliye etmesi, tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine g\u00fcvenilerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ayl\u0131k 13.000,00TL+KDV bedelli olmak \u00fczere 8 y\u0131ll\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fka birine kiraya verildi\u011fi belirtilerek 30.06.2012 tarihinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye etmek i\u00e7in haz\u0131rl\u0131klara ba\u015flamas\u0131, aksi takdirde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan zararlardan ve aradaki kira fark\u0131ndan sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131 bildirilmi\u015ftir. Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edilmemesi \u00fczerine daval\u0131 aleyhine tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine dayal\u0131 icra takibi ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, daval\u0131n\u0131n icra takibine itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine itiraz\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve tahliye davas\u0131nda daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan tahliyesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz 13.02.2013 tarihinde davac\u0131 \u015firkete teslim edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Davac\u0131 vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin, daval\u0131 kirac\u0131n\u0131n tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine g\u00fcvenerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 zemin ve iki kat\u0131 ile birlikte 08.12.2011 d\u00fczenleme tarihli ve 01.07.2012 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile ayl\u0131k 13.000TL+KDV ile ba\u015fka birine kiraya verdi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n kiralanan\u0131 zaman\u0131nda bo\u015falt\u0131p m\u00fcvekkiline teslim etmedi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n zaman\u0131nda tahliye etmemesi nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131ya teslim edilemedi\u011fini, yeni kirac\u0131 ile yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin 11. maddesi gere\u011fince 156.000TL+KDV olmak \u00fczere bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira bedelinin ikinci y\u0131l kiras\u0131na say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l i\u00e7in kira bedeline en az %10 uygulanacak olan kira bedeli art\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira ve kira art\u0131\u015f bedeli gelirinden yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle m\u00fcvekkilinin b\u00fcy\u00fck zarar\u0131na sebebiyet verildi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dedi\u011fi kira bedelleri d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fckten sonra m\u00fcvekkilinin kira gelirinden mahrum kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar\u0131n\u0131n 138.894TL oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek bu bedelin daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir. Mahkemece, yeni kirac\u0131dan al\u0131nmas\u0131 kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira bedelinden ve kira art\u0131\u015f bedeli gelirinden daval\u0131n\u0131n tahliye tarihine kadar \u00f6dedi\u011fi kira bedeli mahsup edilmek suretiyle davac\u0131n\u0131n isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Yukar\u0131da da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere kural olarak bir kimse taraf\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme nedeniyle bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na sokulamaz. Davac\u0131, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi ile imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 11. maddesine g\u00f6re ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n en ge\u00e7 01.08.2012 tarihinde tahliyesini sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 taahh\u00fct etmi\u015f, tahliye ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi takdirde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ilk y\u0131l\u0131na ait kira bedelinin kiraya veren taraf\u0131ndan kirac\u0131dan talep edilmeyece\u011fi, yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan \u00f6demelerin bir sonraki y\u0131l kiras\u0131ndan mahsup edilece\u011fi ve bu h\u00e2lde ikinci y\u0131l i\u00e7in art\u0131\u015f yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131 kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirememesinin nedeni daval\u0131n\u0131n kiralanan\u0131 ge\u00e7 tahliye etmesidir. Bu nedenle kiralanan\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131ya ge\u00e7 teslim edilmesi sebebiyle olu\u015fan zarardan kural olarak daval\u0131 \u015firket sorumludur. Ancak, tazminat miktar\u0131 belirlenirken objektif k\u0131staslara g\u00f6re hareket edilmelidir. Bir ba\u015fka deyi\u015fle tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye y\u00f6nelik subjektif taahh\u00fctlerinin nazara al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve davac\u0131n\u0131n yeni kirac\u0131 ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde ge\u00e7 teslime ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak bir y\u0131ll\u0131k kira bedelinin al\u0131nmayaca\u011f\u0131 ve ikinci y\u0131l kira paras\u0131na art\u0131\u015f uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki taahh\u00fcd\u00fcne dayal\u0131 olarak tazminat hesab\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. Tazmin edilmesi gereken zarar\u0131n kiralanan\u0131n tahliyesinin taahh\u00fct edildi\u011fi tarih (30.06.2012) ile tahliye edildi\u011fi tarih (13.02.2013) aras\u0131ndaki s\u00fcrede davac\u0131n\u0131n yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kira geliri kadar oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc ile buna g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
16. Hukuk Genel Kurulunda yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda, kiralanan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n okul niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu, bu nedenle her zaman kiraya verilemeyece\u011fi, bu durumda mahkemece, kiralanan\u0131n ne kadar s\u00fcre ile kiraya verilebilece\u011fi bir ba\u015fka anlat\u0131mla makul s\u00fcre belirlenerek tazminat hesab\u0131n\u0131n buna g\u00f6re yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n bu de\u011fi\u015fik gerek\u00e7e ile bozulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ile, mahkemece kiralananda ke\u015fif yap\u0131larak tahliye taahh\u00fcd\u00fc tarihi ile tahliye tarihi aras\u0131nda hangi bedel ile kiraya verilece\u011finin belirlenerek buna g\u00f6re tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi gerekti\u011fi, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n ilave gerek\u00e7e ile bozulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan benimsenmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca; mahkemece, Hukuk Genel Kurulunca da benimsenen \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 gerekirken, \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
18. Bu nedenle direnme karar\u0131 bozulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
IV. SONU\u00c7<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen nedenlerden dolay\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun \u201cGe\u00e7ici Madde 3\u201d atf\u0131yla uygulanmakta olan 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 429. maddesi gere\u011fince BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n
\u0130stek h\u00e2linde temyiz pe\u015fin harc\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131rana geri verilmesine,<\/p>\n
Ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 440. maddesi uyar\u0131nca karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren on be\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere, 16.11.2021 tarihinde oy \u00e7oklu\u011fu ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bYarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu’nun 16.11.2021 tarihli, 2017\/1291 E., 2021\/1412 K. 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 2017\/1291 E., 2021\/1412 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 :Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi 1. Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201ctazminat\u201d davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda, \u00d6demi\u015f Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesince verilen davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin karar daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay (Kapat\u0131lan) 6. Hukuk Dairesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonunda bozulmu\u015f, Mahkemece \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnilmi\u015ftir. 2. Direnme karar\u0131 daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir. 3. Hukuk Genel Kurulunca dosyadaki belgeler incelendikten sonra gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc: I. YARGILAMA S\u00dcREC\u0130 Davac\u0131 \u0130stemi: 4. Davac\u0131 vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde; daval\u0131 \u015firketin, m\u00fcvekkili \u015firkete ait olan H\u00fcrriyet Mah. 1697 Sok. No:72 adresinde bulunan okul binas\u0131n\u0131n sadece zemin kat\u0131n\u0131 (di\u011fer katlar\u0131 ba\u015fka bir kirac\u0131ya vermemek kayd\u0131yla) 01.09.2011 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihli ve 10.09.2011 tarihinde tanzim edilen kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile 10 ayl\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yani e\u011fitim d\u00f6nemi sonuna kadar ana s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131 olarak ayl\u0131k 4.000TL+KDV olmak \u00fczere kiralad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 \u015firketin 10.10.2011 tarihinde, kira konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edece\u011fine dair \u201ctahliye taahh\u00fctnamesi\u201d imzalayarak m\u00fcvekkili \u015firkete verdi\u011fini, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 30.06.2012 tarihinde tahliye edilmemesi \u00fczerine daval\u0131 aleyhine tahliye taahh\u00fctnamesine dayal\u0131 icra takibi ba\u015flatt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n icra takibine itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine itiraz\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve tahliye davas\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, yarg\u0131lama neticesinde daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan tahliyesine karar verildi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n bu karar\u0131 temyiz etti\u011fini, daval\u0131 kirac\u0131ya \u00d6demi\u015f 1. Noterli\u011finin 29.05.2012 tarihli ve 4575 yevmiye numaral\u0131 …<\/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-94818","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n