{"id":97209,"date":"2025-05-26T12:32:00","date_gmt":"2025-05-26T09:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/uncategorized-tr\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/"},"modified":"2025-05-26T12:32:00","modified_gmt":"2025-05-26T09:32:00","slug":"yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/","title":{"rendered":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"

T.C.<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay<\/p>\n

7. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n

2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K.<\/p>\n

“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n

MAHKEMES\u0130 : Sakarya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 6. Hukuk Dairesi
\n\u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 : Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n

Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ve yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Karar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurunun istinaf talebinin kabul\u00fc ile yerel mahkeme karan\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131larak yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi ile miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali talebinin reddine, atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi talebinin kabul\u00fcne dair karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak istenilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 13.12.2022 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\u0131 vekili Av. … ve daval\u0131lar vekilleri Av. Ahmek … ve Av. … geldiler. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra i\u015fin incelenerek karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

I.DAVA
\nDavac\u0131 vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin e\u015fi …\u2019nin 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde vefat etti\u011fini, muris …’nin vefat\u0131ndan \u00f6nce 04\/01\/2009 tarihinde el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile vasiyetname d\u00fczenledi\u011fini, bu vasiyetnameye ra\u011fmen daval\u0131lar\u0131n … 3. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinden 08\/07\/2010 tarih ve 2010\/996 Esas, 2010\/986 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi ald\u0131klar\u0131ndan bahisle miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ile yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesini istediler.<\/p>\n

II.CEVAP
\nDaval\u0131lar davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

III.\u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARI
\n\u0130lk derece mahkemesince, davac\u0131 … 3. Noterli\u011fi 19\/09\/2003 tarihli s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile mirastan feragat etmi\u015f ise de muris taraf\u0131ndan 04\/01\/2009 tarihinde el yaz\u0131l\u0131 vasiyetname ile e\u015fimin … da mutlaka verilsin \u015feklinde vasiyetname d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, Kocaeli 4. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2013\/393 E. say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda 04\/01\/2009 tarihli el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile d\u00fczenlenen vasiyetnamede ge\u00e7en “kalan mallar\u0131mda \u015feriat kanunlar\u0131na g\u00f6re pay edilsin” k\u0131sm\u0131n iptaline, vasiyetnamenin di\u011fer k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7erli say\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla davac\u0131n\u0131n atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 olarak veraset ilam\u0131 talep edebilece\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile, 04\/01\/2009 tarihli el yaz\u0131s\u0131 vasiyetname gere\u011fince …’nin atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc ile atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 oldu\u011funa dair belge verilmesine, … 3. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2010\/996 E, 2010\/986 K. say\u0131l\u0131 veraset ilam\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile muris …’nin 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc ile, toplam miras\u0131 20 pay kabul edilerek 5 pay\u0131n\u0131n atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 olan …’ye, 3 pay\u0131n\u0131n …’ye, 3 pay\u0131n\u0131n …’e, 3 pay\u0131n\u0131n …’e, 3 pay\u0131n\u0131n …’ye, 3 pay\u0131n\u0131n …’ye verilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

IV.\u0130ST\u0130NAF
\nA.\u0130stinaf Edenler
\n\u0130lk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n istinaf yoluyla incelenmesi daval\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan talep edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

B.\u0130stinaf Sebepleri
\nDaval\u0131lar vekili istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revsiz oldu\u011funu, davac\u0131n\u0131n mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptaline y\u00f6nelik davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedildi\u011fini, b\u00f6ylelikle mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011finin kesinle\u015fti\u011fini, mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bir miras … kalmayan davac\u0131ya, “haklar\u0131 verilsin” deyimine dayanarak atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilemeyece\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n talebinin miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesine y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu halde mahkemece talep a\u015f\u0131larak atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verildi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n miras hak ve hisselerinin tamam\u0131ndan ivazl\u0131 olarak feragat etti\u011fini, di\u011fer yandan davac\u0131, murisin vefat\u0131ndan bu yana k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli davrand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine ra\u011fmen, sanki mirastan feragat etmemi\u015f gibi bu durumu gizleyerek, Beyo\u011flu 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2011\/354 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 veraset ilam\u0131n\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek ilk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

C.Gerek\u00e7e ve Sonu\u00e7
\nDavac\u0131 …\u2019in ivazl\u0131 olarak mirastan feragat etti\u011fi ve altsoy i\u00e7in sonu\u00e7 do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131ndan iptali istenen … 3. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 08\/07\/2010 tarih ve 2010\/996 Esas, 2010\/986 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinde davac\u0131ya pay verilmeden muris …’nin yasal miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi d\u00fczenlenmesinde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k davac\u0131ya TMK’n\u0131n 598\/2 maddesi uyar\u0131nca atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 oldu\u011funu g\u00f6sterir belge verilmesi gerekirken yasal miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi isabetsiz ise de bu yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi yeniden yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 gerektirmedi\u011finden 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 353\/1-b-2 maddesi gere\u011fince h\u00fckm\u00fcn d\u00fczeltilerek yeniden esas hakk\u0131nda karar verilerek, daval\u0131lar … vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc ile Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinin 20\/02\/2020 tarih ve 2012\/847 Esas, 2020\/310 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n 353\/1-b-2 maddesi gere\u011fince kald\u0131r\u0131larak, esas hakk\u0131nda yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131na, davan\u0131n yeniden esas\u0131yla ilgili olarak; miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n aktif husumet yoklu\u011fundan usulden reddine, atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile davac\u0131 …’nin 04\/01\/2009 tarihli vasiyetname uyar\u0131nca …’nin TMK’n\u0131n 598. maddesi uyar\u0131nca atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011funun tespitine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

V.TEMY\u0130Z
\nA.Temyiz Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar
\nB\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili ve daval\u0131lar vekili temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n

B.Temyiz Sebepleri
\n1.Davac\u0131 vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; \u0130stinaf Mahkemesinin, ilk derece ve b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemelerince davac\u0131n\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131n kabul edildi\u011fi halde miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali y\u00f6n\u00fcnden aktif husumet yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle davan\u0131n reddi h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi iptal edilmedi\u011fi takdirde, davac\u0131n\u0131n miras … daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan teslim edilmeyece\u011fini, vasiyetname iptal edilmedi\u011finden davac\u0131n\u0131n da atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 olarak \u00bc pay\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren tek bir miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesinin zorunlu oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

2.Daval\u0131lar vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esine \u00f6zetle; davac\u0131 dava dilek\u00e7esinde miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi talep etti\u011fi halde talep a\u015f\u0131lmak suretiyle atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verildi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n mirastan feragat etti\u011fini ve a\u00e7\u0131lan dava sonucunda mirastan feragatin kesinle\u015fmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131n kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, TMK 516. maddesine g\u00f6re miras\u00e7\u0131 atanmas\u0131 ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, murisin el yaz\u0131l\u0131 vasiyetnamesinde herhangi bir orandan bahsedilmedi\u011finden miras\u00e7\u0131 atanmaya uygun bir irade olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, murisin vasiyetinde “e\u015fine … da mutlaka verilsin” c\u00fcmlesinden \u00f6nce “kalan mallar\u0131m da \u015feriat kanunlar\u0131na g\u00f6re payla\u015f\u0131ls\u0131n” dedi\u011fini, b\u00f6ylece davac\u0131ya hakk\u0131n\u0131n verilmesi konusunda da \u015feriat kanunlar\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan murisin vasiyetnamesindeki beyan\u0131n TBK 27. ifa olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, el yaz\u0131l\u0131 vasiyetname tarihinin 04\/01\/2009 oldu\u011funu, murisin ise 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde vefat etti\u011fini, muris vasiyetnameyi d\u00fczenledikten sonra yakla\u015f\u0131k bir y\u0131l daha ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu zaman i\u00e7erisinde davac\u0131 ile d\u00fczenledi\u011fi mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden, … ile birlikte d\u00f6nme imkan\u0131 olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen d\u00f6nmedi\u011fini, muris, vasiyet d\u00fczenlendikten sonra ge\u00e7en bir y\u0131l boyunca, …’in miras\u00e7\u0131 olmas\u0131na sebep olacak hi\u00e7 bir beyan ve tasarrufta da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, buradan da murisin davac\u0131y\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131 yapmak arzusunda olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

C.Gerek\u00e7e
\n1.Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ve Hukuki Nitelendirme
\nDava, miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ve yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k verilmesi iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

2.\u0130lgili Hukuk
\n1. 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 29. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fcnde; bir kimsenin sa\u011f veya \u00f6l\u00fc oldu\u011funu veya belirli bir zamanda ya da ba\u015fka bir kimsenin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde sa\u011f bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren kimsenin iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmek zorunda oldu\u011fu; TMK’n\u0131n 30. maddesinde do\u011fum ve \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn n\u00fcfus sicilindeki kay\u0131tlarla ispat olunabilece\u011fi, n\u00fcfus k\u00fct\u00fcklerinde kay\u0131t bulunmamas\u0131 veya bulunan kayd\u0131n do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde ger\u00e7ek durumun her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille kan\u0131tlanabilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hukukumuzda \u00e7eki\u015fmeli yarg\u0131ya tabi davalarda “taraflarca haz\u0131rlama ilkesi” ge\u00e7erlidir. Hakim taraflar\u0131n talepleriyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olup talepte bulunan taraf\u0131n iddia etti\u011fi olaylar ve ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc deliller ile yetinerek karar vermek zorundad\u0131r. \u00c7eki\u015fmesiz yarg\u0131ya tabi davalarda ise re’sen ara\u015ft\u0131rma ilkesi egemendir. Has\u0131ms\u0131z a\u00e7\u0131lan ve \u00e7eki\u015fmesiz yarg\u0131ya tabi olan davalarda verilen kararlar kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm te\u015fkil etmedi\u011fi gibi bu kararlar a\u00e7\u0131lacak bir iptal davas\u0131 sonucunda de\u011fi\u015ftirilebilir veya ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilir.<\/p>\n

2. Miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesine ili\u015fkin davada irs ili\u015fkisi kural olarak n\u00fcfus kay\u0131tlar\u0131 ile ispat olunur. N\u00fcfus kay\u0131tlar\u0131 belgeledikleri olgular\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funa kan\u0131t olu\u015fturur. Bunlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131 kanunlarda ba\u015fka bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a herhangi bir \u015fekle tabi de\u011fildir. (TMK md.7) Hakim \u00e7ekismesiz yarg\u0131da re’sen ara\u015ft\u0131rma ilkesi uyar\u0131nca, davan\u0131n ispat\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli b\u00fct\u00fcn delillere ba\u015fvurabilir.<\/p>\n

3. TMK 516. maddesinde ise \u201cMirasb\u0131rakan, miras\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131 veya belli bir oran\u0131 i\u00e7in bir veya birden \u00e7ok ki\u015fiyi miras\u00e7\u0131 atayabilir. Bir ki\u015finin, miras\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 veya belli bir oran\u0131n\u0131 almas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren her tasarruf, miras\u00e7\u0131 atanmas\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

4. 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 598. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcnde, ba\u015fvuru \u00fczerine yasal miras\u00e7\u0131 olduklar\u0131 belirlenenlere Sulh Mahkemesince miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fatlar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren bir belge verilece\u011fi, ayn\u0131 maddenin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcnde de, miras\u00e7\u0131 atamaya veya vasiyete ili\u015fkin \u00f6l\u00fcme ba\u011fl\u0131 tasarrufa miras\u00e7\u0131lar veya ba\u015fka vasiyet alacakl\u0131lar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan bir ay i\u00e7inde itiraz edilmedi\u011fi taktirde lehine tasarrufta bulunulan kimseye de atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131 veya vasiyet alacakl\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011funu g\u00f6steren bir belge verilmesinin gerekti\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/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 davac\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

2. Daval\u0131lar vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131na gelince; davac\u0131 …, muris … ile birlikte d\u00fczenledi\u011fi … 3. Noterli\u011fi 19\/09\/2003 tarihli mirastan feragat s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile mirastan feragat etmi\u015ftir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile davac\u0131 …\u2019in yasal miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131 kalmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda, yasal miras\u00e7\u0131 s\u0131fat\u0131 kalmayan davac\u0131n\u0131n murisle kan ve soy ili\u015fkisini g\u00f6steren miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptalini isteyemez. Di\u011fer yandan mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n 04.01.2009 tarihli el yaz\u0131l\u0131 vasiyetnamesinde ise davac\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik olarak \u201ce\u015fime de haklar\u0131 verilsin\u201d \u015feklinde bir tasarrufta bulunmu\u015ftur. Davadaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k mirastan feragat ederek yasal miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 yitiren davac\u0131n\u0131n, mirasb\u0131rakan taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen vasiyetnamedeki bu tasarrufuyla atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131 kazan\u0131p kazanamayaca\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

3. Miras\u00e7\u0131 ataman\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenledi\u011fi TMK 516. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda terekenin tamam\u0131n\u0131n veya belirli bir oran\u0131n belirlenmesi suretiyle d\u00fczenlenen tasarruflar\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131 atama say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenmi\u015ftir. Bu bak\u0131mdan vasiyetnamedeki irade beyan\u0131n\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131 atama olarak nitelendirilebilmesi i\u00e7in mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n miras\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 veya belirli oran\u0131 belirtmesi suretiyle tasarrufta bulunmas\u0131 gereklidir.<\/p>\n

4. Somut olaya gelince, dava konusu 04\/01\/2009 tarihli vasiyetname i\u00e7eri\u011finde mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n yaln\u0131zca \u201ce\u015fime de haklar\u0131 verilsin\u201d \u015feklinde bir tasarrufta bulundu\u011fu, tasarruf i\u00e7eri\u011finin terekenin tamam\u0131n\u0131 veya belirli bir oran\u0131n\u0131 kapsamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu ba\u011flamda vasiyetnamedeki bu irade beyan\u0131n\u0131n, TMK 516. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen ko\u015fullarla birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, kanunun \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc miras\u00e7\u0131 atamaya y\u00f6nelik bir tasarrufun bulundu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n

5. Her ne kadar b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesince miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptaline y\u00f6nelik davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi isabetli g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de mirasb\u0131rakan taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan tasarrufta oran belirlenmedi\u011fi i\u00e7in miras\u00e7\u0131 atanmas\u0131 ko\u015fullar\u0131 olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan mahkemece atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu nedenle bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

VI.KARAR
\nA\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;
\nDavac\u0131 vekilinin, 1 numaral\u0131 bentte a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n REDD\u0130NE,
\nDaval\u0131lar vekilinin, 2, 3, 4 ve 5 numaral\u0131 bentlerde a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n

Temyiz olunan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

Pe\u015fin yat\u0131r\u0131lan harc\u0131n istek halinde yat\u0131rana iadesine,<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay duru\u015fma vekalet \u00fccreti olan 8.400,00 TL\u2019nin davac\u0131 taraftan al\u0131narak daval\u0131lara verilmesine,<\/p>\n

Dosyan\u0131n karar\u0131 veren B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesine,<\/p>\n

13.12.2022 tarihinde oy birli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n

\u200bYarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 13.12.2022 tarihli, 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 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 7. Hukuk Dairesi 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 : Sakarya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 6. Hukuk Dairesi \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 : Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ve yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurunun istinaf talebinin kabul\u00fc ile yerel mahkeme karan\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131larak yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi ile miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali talebinin reddine, atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi talebinin kabul\u00fcne dair karar verilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak istenilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 13.12.2022 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\u0131 vekili Av. … ve daval\u0131lar vekilleri Av. Ahmek … ve Av. … geldiler. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra i\u015fin incelenerek karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: I.DAVA Davac\u0131 vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin e\u015fi …\u2019nin 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde vefat etti\u011fini, muris …’nin vefat\u0131ndan \u00f6nce 04\/01\/2009 tarihinde el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile vasiyetname d\u00fczenledi\u011fini, bu vasiyetnameye ra\u011fmen daval\u0131lar\u0131n … 3. Sulh Hukuk …<\/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-97209","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nYarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 - Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 : Sakarya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 6. Hukuk Dairesi \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 : Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ve yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurunun istinaf talebinin kabul\u00fc ile yerel mahkeme karan\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131larak yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi ile miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali talebinin reddine, atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi talebinin kabul\u00fcne dair karar verilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak istenilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 13.12.2022 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\u0131 vekili Av. … ve daval\u0131lar vekilleri Av. Ahmek … ve Av. … geldiler. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra i\u015fin incelenerek karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: I.DAVA Davac\u0131 vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin e\u015fi …\u2019nin 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde vefat etti\u011fini, muris …’nin vefat\u0131ndan \u00f6nce 04\/01\/2009 tarihinde el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile vasiyetname d\u00fczenledi\u011fini, bu vasiyetnameye ra\u011fmen daval\u0131lar\u0131n … 3. Sulh Hukuk …\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Hukuki Haber.net\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0430\u0432\u0442\u043e\u0440\u043e\u043c\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Hukuki Haber.net\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Hukuki Haber.net\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/001a271de994a0aa3f90eea084424822\"},\"headline\":\"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\"},\"wordCount\":2271,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Hukuki Haberler\"],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\",\"name\":\"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 - Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#website\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/\",\"name\":\"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l\",\"description\":\"Avukat Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l Antalya Barosu\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/siyah-logo-svg.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/siyah-logo-svg.svg\",\"width\":1080,\"height\":1080,\"caption\":\"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/001a271de994a0aa3f90eea084424822\",\"name\":\"Hukuki Haber.net\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57d8a49151495586611a149d29fc42865b951dc053a84709a3172ccb5abf3118?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57d8a49151495586611a149d29fc42865b951dc053a84709a3172ccb5abf3118?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Hukuki Haber.net\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.hukukihaber.net\"],\"url\":\"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/author\/hukukihabernet\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 - Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131","og_description":"T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 : Sakarya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 6. Hukuk Dairesi \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 : Kocaeli 1. Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali ve yeni miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurunun istinaf talebinin kabul\u00fc ile yerel mahkeme karan\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131larak yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi ile miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesinin iptali talebinin reddine, atanm\u0131\u015f miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k belgesi verilmesi talebinin kabul\u00fcne dair karar verilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m daval\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak istenilmekle; kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, 13.12.2022 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\u0131 vekili Av. … ve daval\u0131lar vekilleri Av. Ahmek … ve Av. … geldiler. A\u00e7\u0131k duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131. Gelenlerin s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenildikten sonra i\u015fin incelenerek karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlenerek dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: I.DAVA Davac\u0131 vekili, m\u00fcvekkilinin e\u015fi …\u2019nin 20\/02\/2010 tarihinde vefat etti\u011fini, muris …’nin vefat\u0131ndan \u00f6nce 04\/01\/2009 tarihinde el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile vasiyetname d\u00fczenledi\u011fini, bu vasiyetnameye ra\u011fmen daval\u0131lar\u0131n … 3. Sulh Hukuk …","og_url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/","og_site_name":"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l","article_published_time":"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00","author":"Hukuki Haber.net","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043d\u043e \u0430\u0432\u0442\u043e\u0440\u043e\u043c":"Hukuki Haber.net","\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"11 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/"},"author":{"name":"Hukuki Haber.net","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/001a271de994a0aa3f90eea084424822"},"headline":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131","datePublished":"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/"},"wordCount":2271,"publisher":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Hukuki Haberler"],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/","url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/","name":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi'nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 - Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-05-26T09:32:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/hukukihaber\/yargitay-7-hukuk-dairesinin-2021-2498-e-2022-7686-k-sayili-karari\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021\/2498 E., 2022\/7686 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#website","url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/","name":"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l","description":"Avukat Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l Antalya Barosu","publisher":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#organization","name":"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l","url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/siyah-logo-svg.svg","contentUrl":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/siyah-logo-svg.svg","width":1080,"height":1080,"caption":"Av. Deniz Can K\u0131z\u0131l"},"image":{"@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/001a271de994a0aa3f90eea084424822","name":"Hukuki Haber.net","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57d8a49151495586611a149d29fc42865b951dc053a84709a3172ccb5abf3118?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57d8a49151495586611a149d29fc42865b951dc053a84709a3172ccb5abf3118?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Hukuki Haber.net"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.hukukihaber.net"],"url":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/author\/hukukihabernet\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97209","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=97209"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97209\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97209"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97209"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/denizcankizil.tr\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97209"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}