T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
1. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2019\/1534 E., 2019\/2933 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : ASL\u0130YE HUKUK MAHKEMES\u0130
\nDAVA T\u00dcR\u00dc : TAPU \u0130PTAL\u0130 VE TESC\u0130L – ECR\u0130M\u0130S\u0130L<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen tapu iptali ve tescil, ecrimisil davas\u0131 sonunda, yerel mahkemece as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddine, kar\u015f\u0131 davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin olarak verilen karar davac\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 ve daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yasal s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde temyiz edilmi\u015f olmakla dosya incelendi, Tetkik Hakimi …\u2019un raporu okundu, a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlendi, gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc.<\/p>\n
-KARAR-<\/p>\n
As\u0131l dava inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil, kar\u015f\u0131 dava ecrimisil istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131, maliki oldu\u011fu … parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki A-Blok 18 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc kredi almas\u0131 ve kredi borcu bitti\u011finde kendisine iade edilmesi amac\u0131yla daval\u0131lardan …\u2019a sat\u0131\u015f g\u00f6stermek suretiyle devretti\u011fini, daval\u0131 …\u2019un ise di\u011fer daval\u0131 … ile anla\u015farak ta\u015f\u0131nmaza haciz koydurdu\u011funu, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n cebri … yoluyla alaca\u011f\u0131na mahsuben daval\u0131 …\u2019e ihale edildi\u011fini, …\u2019in , di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019tan herhangi bir alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yap\u0131lan i\u015flemlerin muvazaal\u0131 oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrep daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na olan tapunun iptali ile ad\u0131na tescil istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 …, iyi niyetli oldu\u011funu, Kurtulu\u015f ile aralar\u0131ndaki ticari ili\u015fki nedeniyle \u00f6denmeyen bor\u00e7lardan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan … takibi suretiyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 edindi\u011fini belirterek as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015f, kar\u015f\u0131 davas\u0131nda; ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 ihaleden sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131,davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 hi\u00e7bir hakka dayanmadan kullanmaya devam etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek cebri ihale tarihinden( 20.03.2012 tarihinden ) itibaren belirlenecek ecrimisil bedelinin yasal faizi ile birlikte tahsilini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 … davaya cevap vermemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan ihale ile sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ihalenin kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, iddialar\u0131n ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddine, kar\u015f\u0131 davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden; davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 16.02.2006 tarihinde dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 …\u2019a sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik etti\u011fi, ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn ta\u015f\u0131nmaza Garanti Bankas\u0131 lehine 65.000 TL \u2018lik ipotek kondu\u011fu, daval\u0131 …\u2019in, …\u2019dan alacaklar\u0131 nedeniyle … 22…. M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc\u2019n\u00fcn 2009\/11535 E. say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131ndan … takibi ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131, … 2…. M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc\u2019n\u00fcn 2009\/11535 E. say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile de ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerine 20.04.2010 tarihinde haciz kondu\u011fu, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00fczerindeki haciz ve ipotek ile birlikte 23.02.2012 tarihinde tekrar davac\u0131ya devredildi\u011fi, … 22…. M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc\u2019n\u00fcn 2009\/11535 E. dosyas\u0131 ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n cebri sat\u0131\u015fa \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 20.03.2012 tarihli ihale ile daval\u0131 … taraf\u0131ndan cebri ihale yoluyla iktisap edildi\u011fi, ihalenin feshi amac\u0131yla a\u00e7\u0131lan … … 1…. Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2012\/195 E. say\u0131l\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verildi\u011fi, karar\u0131n derecattan ge\u00e7erek 20.12.2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fti\u011fi,dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 21.01.2014 tarihinde daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na tescil edildi\u011fi, 7.01.2014 tarihli eldeki kar\u015f\u0131 davada da ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n halen daval\u0131ya teslim edilmedi\u011fi iddias\u0131 ile ihale tarihinden (20.03.2012), dava tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in ecrimisil istenildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.
\nToplanan deliller ve t\u00fcm dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddedilmi\u015f olmas\u0131nda kural olarak bir isabetsizlik yoktur. As\u0131l davan\u0131n davac\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131na gelince;<\/p>\n
4721 say\u0131l\u0131 TMK’nin 705.maddesinde \u201cMiras, mahkeme karar\u0131, cebri …, i\u015fgal, kamula\u015ft\u0131rma halleri ile kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen di\u011fer hallerde, m\u00fclkiyet tescilden \u00f6nce kazan\u0131l\u0131r. Ancak, bu hallerde malikin tasarruf i\u015flemleri yapabilmesi, m\u00fclkiyetin tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne tescil edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.\u201d denilerek, m\u00fclkiyetin kazan\u0131lmas\u0131 ve tescil ko\u015fullar\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir, … \u0130flas Kanunu’nun 134\/1 maddesinde ise \u201c… dairesi taraf\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kendisine ihale edilen al\u0131c\u0131, o ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini iktisap etmi\u015f olur. \u0130hale kesinle\u015finceye kadar ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ne \u015fekilde muhafaza ve idare edilece\u011fi … dairesi taraf\u0131ndan kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcyle, cebri ihale sonucu m\u00fclkiyetin kazan\u0131lmas\u0131 ve ihale kesinle\u015finceye kadar ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n idare ve korunma \u015fekli belirlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Bu yasal d\u00fczenlemelere g\u00f6re ihale ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131n alan ki\u015fi veya kurum ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini ihalenin kesinle\u015fmesi halinde ihale tarihinde kazanm\u0131\u015f olur.<\/p>\n
Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta, cebri ihale 20.03.2012 tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup daval\u0131lardan … taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan ihalenin feshi davas\u0131 reddedilerek 20.12.2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Bu durumda, ihale al\u0131c\u0131s\u0131 daval\u0131 …\u2019e m\u00fclkiyetin 20.12.2013 tarihinde ge\u00e7ti\u011fi ve ihale tarihinden itibaren daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n ecrimisil isteyebilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2. maddesinde ise \u201cTa\u015f\u0131nmaz bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan veya hacizden evvelki bir tarihte yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi bir belge ile belgelenmi\u015f bir akte dayanmayarak ba\u015fkalar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise onbe\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde tahliyesi i\u00e7in bor\u00e7luya veya i\u015fgal edene bir tahliye emri tebli\u011f edilir. Bu m\u00fcddet i\u00e7inde tahliye edilmezse zorla \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131nmaz al\u0131c\u0131ya teslim olunur\u201d denilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan yasa h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re, ihale yoluyla sat\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgali halinde uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Al\u0131c\u0131ya ihale edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ki\u015fi yada ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise \u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2 maddesindeki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 i\u00e7eren ihtarnamenin i\u015fgalciye g\u00f6nderilerek 15 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre tan\u0131nmas\u0131 ondan sonra ecrimisil iste\u011finde bulunulmas\u0131 gereklidir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6te yandan; ecrimisilden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 haks\u0131z kullanan veya kulland\u0131ran sorumludur. Ecrimisile konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kar\u015f\u0131 dava tarihi itibari ile de kullan\u0131m\u0131n devam edip, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131ya teslim edilmedi\u011fi taraflar\u0131n ve esasen mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcndedir. Di\u011fer taraftan ihale tarihinde davac\u0131n\u0131n kay\u0131t maliki oldu\u011fu, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabit oldu\u011funa g\u00f6re \u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ihtar ke\u015fide edilmeksizin ecrimisilden sorumlu tutulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011finde ku\u015fku yoktur.<\/p>\n
H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca; … \u0130flas Kanunu’nun 134. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131 ve T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 705. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131, ihalenin feshi davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n 20\/12\/2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fti\u011fi buna g\u00f6re ihale g\u00fcn\u00fc olan 20.03.2012 tarihinde m\u00fclkiyetin davac\u0131ya ge\u00e7ti\u011fi (T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu’nun 275\/2 maddesi, Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 225\/2 maddesi) g\u00f6zetilerek 20.03.2012 tarihinden itibaren belirlenecek ecrimisilin h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekirken de\u011finilen hususlar g\u00f6zard\u0131 edilerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclen temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcyle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn (6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n ge\u00e7ici 3.maddesi yollamas\u0131 ile) 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 HUMK’un 428.maddesi gere\u011fince BOZULMASINA, al\u0131nan pe\u015fin harc\u0131n temyiz edene geri verilmesine, 13.05.2019 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
8. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2018\/15175 E., 2018\/19714 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen ve yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan davada yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda Mahkemece, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f olup h\u00fckm\u00fcn davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine, Dairece dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc.<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131, 243 ada 11 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 …… \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2009\/1475 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 icra dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lan cebri icra yolu ile sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan haks\u0131z yere kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 sebebi ile …… \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2013\/539 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 takip dosyas\u0131 ile icra takibi ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak daval\u0131n\u0131n haks\u0131z yere takibe itiraz etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, itiraz\u0131n iptaline ve icra inkar tazminat\u0131na karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131, davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece,\u201d… davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan …… \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’n\u00fcn 2013\/539 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda daval\u0131 aleyhine 11.487,00TL ecrimisil alaca\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in ilams\u0131z takipte bulundu\u011fu, alaca\u011f\u0131n sebebinin ise …… \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2009\/1475 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda ipotek bor\u00e7lusu olan daval\u0131n\u0131n hissedar\u0131 oldu\u011fu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n icra ile sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 sonras\u0131nda daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 teslim etmemesi oldu\u011fu, daval\u0131n\u0131n takibe itiraz etti\u011fi ve takibin durdu\u011fu, alacak sebebine konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n icra sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n 23\/09\/2010 tarihi oldu\u011fu, bor\u00e7lu daval\u0131ya tahliye emrinin ise 01\/11\/2012 tarihinde tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi, 2004 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u0130K’nin 135\/2. maddesine g\u00f6re, \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde tahliyesi i\u00e7in i\u015fgal edene veya bor\u00e7luya tahliye emrinin g\u00f6nderilece\u011finin ve bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz tahliye edilmez ise ilgilinin zorla \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n al\u0131c\u0131ya teslim edilece\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi, davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tahliye emrinden \u00f6nceki yani 23\/09\/2010-01\/10\/2012 tarihleri i\u00e7in ecrimisil talebinde bulunuldu\u011fu, Yarg\u0131tay 3. Hukuk Dairesinin 24\/01\/2008 tarih, 2007\/19615 Esas, 2008\/958 karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131ndan da anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere tahliye emrinin tebli\u011finden itibaren 15 g\u00fcn sonras\u0131 i\u00e7in i\u015fgalin haks\u0131z olaca\u011f\u0131 ve bu tarihten sonras\u0131 i\u00e7in ecrimisil tazminat\u0131 talep edilebilece\u011fi, daval\u0131n\u0131n haks\u0131z i\u015fgalci durumunda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan davac\u0131n\u0131n davas\u0131n\u0131n reddi gerekmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 vekili her ne kadar alacakl\u0131ya k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet tazminat\u0131 \u00f6dettirilmesine karar verilmesi talep edilmi\u015f ise de bu tazminata karar verilebilmesi i\u00e7in davac\u0131n\u0131n takipte ve davada haks\u0131z ve k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetinin ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131..\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. H\u00fck\u00fcm, davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Dava, ecrimisil alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n takibinden kaynaklanan itiraz\u0131n iptali ve icra inkar tazminat\u0131n\u0131n tahsili istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden; …… \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2009\/1475 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131n\u0131n alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n (eldeki davada davac\u0131) ……kas\u0131 A.\u015e. bor\u00e7lusunun (dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131) …… oldu\u011fu, alacakl\u0131 Banka taraf\u0131ndan ipote\u011fin paraya \u00e7evrilmesi suretiyle yap\u0131lan takip sonucu, daval\u0131 … ve arkada\u015flar\u0131 ad\u0131na tapuda kay\u0131tl\u0131 dava konusu 243 ada 11 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n icra dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden 13\/09\/2010 tarihinde davac\u0131 bankaya sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 23.09.2010 tarihinde banka ad\u0131na tapuya kay\u0131t edildi\u011fi, 30.10.2012 tarihinde ise dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131……\u2019a ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n devredildi\u011fi, davac\u0131 banka taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131ya 15 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre i\u00e7eren \u0130\u0130K’nin 135\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca g\u00f6nderilen tahliye emrinin 01\/11\/2012 tarihinde tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi, \u00f6ncesinde de rehin veren s\u0131fat\u0131yla daval\u0131ya \u0130cra Emrinin 10.07.2009 tarihinde tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4721 say\u0131l\u0131 TMK’nin 705.maddesinde \u201cMiras, mahkeme karar\u0131, cebri icra, i\u015fgal, kamula\u015ft\u0131rma halleri ile kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen di\u011fer hallerde, m\u00fclkiyet tescilden \u00f6nce kazan\u0131l\u0131r. Ancak, bu hallerde malikin tasarruf i\u015flemleri yapabilmesi, m\u00fclkiyetin tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne tescil edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.\u201d
\n\u0130\u0130K’nin 134\/1 maddesinde ise \u201c\u0130cra dairesi taraf\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kendisine ihale edilen al\u0131c\u0131 o ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini iktisap etmi\u015f olur. \u0130hale kesinle\u015finceye kadar ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ne \u015fekilde muhafaza ve idare edilece\u011fi icra dairesi taraf\u0131ndan kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d d\u00fczenlemesine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu yasal d\u00fczenlemelere g\u00f6re ihale ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131n alan ki\u015fi veya kurum ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini ihale tarihinde kazanm\u0131\u015f olur. \u0130\u0130K’nin 135\/2. maddesinde ise \u201cTa\u015f\u0131nmaz bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan veya hacizden evvelki bir tarihte yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi bir belge ile belgelenmi\u015f bir akte dayanmayarak ba\u015fkalar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise onbe\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde tahliyesi i\u00e7in bor\u00e7luya veya i\u015fgal edene bir tahliye emri tebli\u011f edilir. Bu m\u00fcddet i\u00e7inde tahliye edilmezse zorla \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131nmaz al\u0131c\u0131ya teslim olunur\u201d denilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan yasa h\u00fckm\u00fc ihale yoluyla sat\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgali halinde uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulmaktad\u0131r. Al\u0131c\u0131ya ihale edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ki\u015fi yada ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise \u0130\u0130K’nin 135\/2 maddesindeki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 i\u00e7eren ihtarnamenin i\u015fgalci \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye g\u00f6nderilerek 15 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre tan\u0131nmas\u0131 ondan sonra ecrimisil iste\u011finde bulunulmas\u0131 gereklidir.<\/p>\n
Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli ta\u015f\u0131nmazda icra dosyas\u0131n\u0131n rehin\/ipotek veren s\u0131fat\u0131yla yer alan daval\u0131n\u0131n ihale s\u00fcrecinden ba\u015ftan beri haberdar oldu\u011fu, bu durumda \u0130\u0130K 135\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ihtarname ke\u015fide etmeye gerek bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ihale tarihinden itibaren k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli \u015fagil konumuna geldi\u011fi ihtar\u0131n cebri icra yoluyla tahliyesi i\u00e7in gerekti\u011fi, 3.ki\u015finin iyiniyetini ortadan kald\u0131rmak i\u00e7in zorunlu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. TMK 705 ve \u0130\u0130K 134. maddelerine g\u00f6re m\u00fclkiyetin ihale an\u0131nda al\u0131c\u0131ya ge\u00e7ece\u011fi de g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde bulunduruldu\u011funda, kural olarak daval\u0131n\u0131n bu tarihten itibaren ecrimisil \u00f6demekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc tutulmalar\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, davac\u0131 vekilinin talebi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 kal\u0131narak 23.09.2010-01.10.2012 d\u00f6nemi i\u00e7in ecrimisil hesaplamas\u0131 yap\u0131larak olu\u015facak sonuca g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekirken, dosya kapsam\u0131na uygun d\u00fc\u015fmeyen gerek\u00e7e ile davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7: Davac\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itiraz\u0131 yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenle yerinde oldu\u011fundan kabul\u00fcyle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’nin Ge\u00e7ici 3. maddesi yollamas\u0131yla 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 HUMK’un 428. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA, taraflarca HUMK’un 440\/I maddesi gere\u011fince Yarg\u0131tay Daire ilam\u0131n\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren ilama kar\u015f\u0131 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde karar d\u00fczeltme iste\u011finde bulunulabilece\u011fine, 05\/12\/2018 tarihinde oy \u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.
\n(Muhalif)<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eI OY YAZISI<\/p>\n
Ecrimisil, di\u011fer bir deyi\u015fle haks\u0131z i\u015fgal tazminat\u0131, zilyet olmayan malikin, malik olmayan k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli zilyetten isteyebilece\u011fi bir tazminatt\u0131r. 08\/03\/1956 tarihli 22\/4 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihat\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda, fuzuli i\u015fgalin niteli\u011fi itibariyle haks\u0131z bir eylem say\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, haks\u0131z i\u015fgal nedeniyle olu\u015fan zarar\u0131n tazmin edilmesi gerekece\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Somut olayda, davac\u0131 … A.\u015e. vekili taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131 aleyhine ecrimisil alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tahsili i\u00e7in ba\u015flat\u0131lan ilams\u0131z takipte, daval\u0131 bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan borca itiraz edilmesi \u00fczerine, … vekilince itiraz\u0131n iptali davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ecrimisil alaca\u011f\u0131na konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n … A\u015e vekili taraf\u0131ndan bor\u00e7lu…… ile daval\u0131n\u0131n da i\u00e7lerinde bulundu\u011fu ipotekli ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikleri aleyhine ba\u015flat\u0131lan ipote\u011fin paraya \u00e7evrilmesi yoluyla takipte 13.09.2010 tarihinde yap\u0131lan ihalede alacakl\u0131 … A.\u015e. taraf\u0131ndan alaca\u011fa mahsuben sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, ihalenin kesinle\u015fme s\u00fcrecinin tamamlanmas\u0131ndan sonra, 21.09.2010 tarihinde \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnce Tapu Sicil M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcg\u00fcne yaz\u0131lan yaz\u0131 \u00fczerine … A.\u015e. ad\u0131na 23.09.2010 tarihinde tescil edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
… A.\u015e. vekili \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden 26\/04\/2011 tarihinde \u0130\u0130K. m. 135\/2’ye g\u00f6re tahliye emri g\u00f6nderilmesini talep etmi\u015f, \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnce daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na tahliye emri d\u00fczenlenip g\u00f6nderilmemi\u015f tahliye emrinin tebli\u011fi sa\u011flanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
15\/10\/2012 tarihinde … A.\u015e. vekili yeniden tahliye emri g\u00f6nderilmesini talep etmesi \u00fczerine daval\u0131ya 01\/11\/2012 tarihinde tahliye emri tebli\u011f edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
… A.\u015e. taraf\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz 30\/10\/2012 tarihinde Erol Turkat’a sat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u0130\u0130K madde 135\/2 “Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan veya hacizden evvelki bir tarihte yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi bir belge ile belgelenmi\u015f bir akte dayanmayarak ba\u015fkalar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde tahliyesi i\u00e7in bor\u00e7luya veya i\u015fgal edene bir tahliye emri tebli\u011f edilir. Bu m\u00fcddet i\u00e7inde tahliye edilmezse, zorla \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131nmaz al\u0131caya teslim edilir” h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermektedir.<\/p>\n
An\u0131lan maddede, tahliye emri g\u00f6nderilmesi i\u00e7in bor\u00e7lu kay\u0131t maliki ya da \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bir ayr\u0131m yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan bor\u00e7lu da olsa \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi de olsa tahliyesi, i\u00e7in \u0130\u0130K m. 135\/2 ye g\u00f6re, tahliye emri g\u00f6nderilmesi gerekir. H\u00fckm\u00fcn ifade etti\u011fi anlam a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ihale yoluyla sat\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 halinde tahliyesi, \u0130\u0130K. m. 135\/2’ye g\u00f6re sa\u011flanacakt\u0131r. \u0130\u0130K. m. 135\/2 h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan bor\u00e7lu ya da ipotekli ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin, tahliye emri g\u00f6nderilmeden ihalenin kesinle\u015fmesiyle k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli haks\u0131z i\u015fgalci durumuna gelece\u011fi kabul edilemez. Kanunen cevaz verilen bir durumda ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli i\u015fgalci say\u0131lmas\u0131 Yasa h\u00fckm\u00fcne de uygun olmaz.<\/p>\n
Kald\u0131 ki davac\u0131 … A.\u015e vekilinin 23\/09\/2010 tarihinde m\u00fcvekkili ad\u0131na tescil edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tahliyesi i\u00e7in 15\/10\/2012 tarihinde talepte bulunarak 01\/11\/2012 tarihinde ancak tahliye emrinin tebli\u011fini sa\u011flamakla, tahliyenin gecikmesinde kusurlu oldu\u011funun da kabul\u00fc gerekir.<\/p>\n
Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tahliyesi i\u00e7in yasal prosed\u00fcr\u00fcn i\u015fletilmesini zaman\u0131nda istemeden tahliyenin gecikmesine kendi kusurlu davran\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile sebep oldu\u011fu halde ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in daval\u0131dan ecrimisil talebinde bulunamaz.<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131m nedenlerden dolay\u0131 Mahkemece verilen davan\u0131n reddi karar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011fu kanaatinde oldu\u011fumdan \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fun bozma gerek\u00e7elerine kat\u0131lm\u0131yorum.<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
1. Hukuk Dairesi<\/p>\n
2014\/15856 E., 2015\/566 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : KAHRAMANMARA\u015e 1. ASL\u0130YE HUKUK MAHKEMES\u0130
\nTAR\u0130H\u0130 : 21\/11\/2013
\nNUMARASI : 2009\/583-2013\/653<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen davada;<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131, dava konusu 574 ada 1 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 2. \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2002\/969 say\u0131l\u0131 icra dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lan takip sonucunda ihale ile 7.9.2006 tarihinde sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131lar\u0131n dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bor\u00e7lu \u015firket yetkilileri ile kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ne s\u00fcrerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye etmediklerini belirtip ecrimisile karar verilmesini istemi\u015f; yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda talebini \u0131slah ederek, tahliye an\u0131nda daval\u0131larca g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclen ve zarar verilen e\u015fyalar i\u00e7in maddi tazminat da talep etti\u011fini bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131lar, \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazda bulunan fabrika binas\u0131n\u0131n belirli b\u00f6l\u00fcmlerini 19.7.2006 tarihli kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile kiralad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, icra m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnce kendilerine 4.9.2008 tarihine kadar tahliye i\u00e7in s\u00fcre verildi\u011fini, 3.9.2008 tarihinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tahliye edildi\u011fini, bu nedenle ecrimisil istenemeyece\u011fini belirtip davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece, 8.7.2008 tarihinde d\u00fczenlenen tutanak ile icra m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan \u0130cra \u0130flas Kanununun 135\/2. maddesi gere\u011fince daval\u0131 \u0130brahim’e 15 g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tahliye etmesinin bildirildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n ancak bu s\u00fcrenin bitti\u011fi 24.7.2008 tarihinden dava tarihine kadar ecrimisil isteyebilece\u011fi, daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan zarar verildi\u011fi veya al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilen m\u00fctemmim c\u00fczlerin nelerden ibaret oldu\u011fu, de\u011feri vs. konularda herhangi bir tespit yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, afaki olarak hesaplama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hakkaniyete uygun olmayaca\u011f\u0131, ayr\u0131ca s\u00f6z konusu zarar\u0131n daval\u0131larca ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi iddias\u0131n\u0131n yeterli deliller ile kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle ecrimisil iste\u011finin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne, maddi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Karar, davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan s\u00fcresinde temyiz edilmi\u015f olmakla; Tetkik Hakimi …………’\u0131n raporu okundu, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi al\u0131nd\u0131. Dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc.<\/p>\n
-KARAR-<\/p>\n
Dava, m\u00fcstakilen ecrimisil; \u0131slahla ecrimisil ve maddi tazminat isteklerine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece, ecrimisil iste\u011finin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne, tazminat iste\u011finin reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 574 ada 1 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n 1853\/2400 pay\u0131n\u0131 7.9.2006 tarihinde yap\u0131lan ihalede sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131lar\u0131n dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 Mustafa Kaygusuz ile yapt\u0131klar\u0131 19.7.2006 tarihli adi yaz\u0131l\u0131 kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayanarak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 kulland\u0131klar\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bo\u015falt\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in 8.7.2008 tarihinde \u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2 maddesi uyar\u0131nca daval\u0131lara 15 g\u00fcn mehil verildi\u011fi, 5.9.2008 tarihinde ecrimisil iste\u011fiyle dava a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 22.4.2010 tarihinde dava \u0131slah edilerek ecrimisilin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra daval\u0131larca al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilen menkul e\u015fyalar ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaza verilen zararlar i\u00e7in 20.000,00.-TL maddi tazminat istenildi\u011fi, mahkemece 3 kez bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 14.11.2012 havale tarihli bilirki\u015fi raporu h\u00fckme esas al\u0131narak ecrimisil iste\u011finin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Gerek 4721 s. TMK’nun 705. maddesi, gerekse \u0130\u0130K’nun 134. maddesi h\u00fck\u00fcmleri gere\u011fi cebri icrada m\u00fclkiyet ihale ile al\u0131c\u0131ya ge\u00e7er. Tescil veya teslim cebri art\u0131rmalarda m\u00fclkiyetin ge\u00e7i\u015fi i\u00e7in zorunlu de\u011fildir. TMK’nun 705. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi gibi, tescil ihale yoluyla m\u00fclkiyet kendisine ge\u00e7en al\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n, temliki tasarrufta bulunabilmesi i\u00e7in gereklidir. \u0130hale ile m\u00fclkiyeti kazanan al\u0131c\u0131, kural olarak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yarar ve hasar\u0131n\u0131 da \u00fcstlenmi\u015f olur. (6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK m. 208) Bu durumda al\u0131c\u0131 malik s\u0131fat\u0131yla, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 i\u015fgal eden \u015fahs\u0131n tahliyesini (\u0130\u0130K m. 135\/2 kapsam\u0131nda) isteyebilece\u011fi gibi, fuzuli \u015fagil aleyhine ecrimisil istemiyle dava da a\u00e7abilir. Ancak a\u00e7\u0131lacak bu davada ecrimisil, bor\u00e7luya g\u00f6nderilecek ihtar\u0131n tebliginden 15 g\u00fcn sonras\u0131 i\u00e7in istenebilecektir. \u0130halenin feshi istenilmi\u015f ise, bu konudaki dava sonu\u00e7lan\u0131p ihale kesinle\u015finceye kadar, sat\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz icra dairesi taraf\u0131ndan muhafaza ve idare edilir (\u0130\u0130K m 134\/1).<\/p>\n
Somut olayda, yukar\u0131da de\u011finilen yasal d\u00fczenlemeler dikkate al\u0131narak, ihale tarihinden sonra \u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca yap\u0131lan ihtarda verilen 15 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcrenin bitiminden (24.7.2008 tarihinden) dava tarihine kadar ecrimisil hesab\u0131 yap\u0131larak, belirlenen miktara h\u00fckmedilmesinde bir isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00d6te yandan, davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazda payda\u015f oldu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden pay\u0131 oran\u0131nda ecrimisile h\u00fckmedilmesi yerine ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tamam\u0131 i\u00e7in belirlenen miktara h\u00fckmedilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fil ise de, bu husus daval\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmedi\u011finden bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ayr\u0131ca, davac\u0131n\u0131n maddi tazminat iste\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden usul\u00fcnce a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131p har\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lan bir dava bulunmamaktad\u0131r. K\u0131smi \u0131slah ile de, dava dilek\u00e7esinde bulunmayan bir talebin davaya dahil edilmesi olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, mahkemece maddi tazminat iste\u011finin reddine karar verilmesi, bu gerek\u00e7eyle sonucu itibariyle do\u011frudur.<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle; dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine, toplanan delillere, h\u00fckm\u00fcn dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 yasal ve hukuksal gerek\u00e7eye, delillerin takdirinde bir isabetsizlik bulunmamas\u0131na g\u00f6re, davac\u0131n\u0131n temyiz itiraz\u0131 yerinde de\u011fildir. Reddiyle usul ve yasaya uygun olan h\u00fckm\u00fcn ONANMASINA, Har\u00e7lar Kanununun de\u011fi\u015fik 13. maddesinin j. Bendi gere\u011fince davac\u0131dan har\u00e7 al\u0131nmas\u0131na yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na, 19.01.2015 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAl\u0131c\u0131ya ihale edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ki\u015fi yada ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fgal edilmekte ise \u0130\u0130K’nun 135\/2 maddesindeki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 i\u00e7eren ihtarnamenin i\u015fgalciye g\u00f6nderilerek 15 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre tan\u0131nmas\u0131 ondan sonra ecrimisil iste\u011finde bulunulmas\u0131 gereklidir.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi 2019\/1534 E., 2019\/2933 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 : ASL\u0130YE HUKUK MAHKEMES\u0130 DAVA T\u00dcR\u00dc : TAPU \u0130PTAL\u0130 VE TESC\u0130L – ECR\u0130M\u0130S\u0130L Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen tapu iptali ve tescil, ecrimisil davas\u0131 sonunda, yerel mahkemece as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddine, kar\u015f\u0131 davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin olarak verilen karar davac\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 ve daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yasal s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde temyiz edilmi\u015f olmakla dosya incelendi, Tetkik Hakimi …\u2019un raporu okundu, a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlendi, gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc. -KARAR- As\u0131l dava inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil, kar\u015f\u0131 dava ecrimisil istemine ili\u015fkindir. Davac\u0131, maliki oldu\u011fu … parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki A-Blok 18 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc kredi almas\u0131 ve kredi borcu bitti\u011finde kendisine iade edilmesi amac\u0131yla daval\u0131lardan …\u2019a sat\u0131\u015f g\u00f6stermek suretiyle devretti\u011fini, daval\u0131 …\u2019un ise di\u011fer daval\u0131 … ile anla\u015farak ta\u015f\u0131nmaza haciz koydurdu\u011funu, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n cebri … yoluyla alaca\u011f\u0131na mahsuben daval\u0131 …\u2019e ihale edildi\u011fini, …\u2019in , di\u011fer daval\u0131 …\u2019tan herhangi bir alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yap\u0131lan i\u015flemlerin muvazaal\u0131 oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrep daval\u0131 … ad\u0131na olan tapunun iptali ile ad\u0131na tescil istemi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 …, iyi niyetli oldu\u011funu, Kurtulu\u015f ile aralar\u0131ndaki ticari ili\u015fki nedeniyle \u00f6denmeyen bor\u00e7lardan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan … takibi suretiyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 edindi\u011fini belirterek as\u0131l davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015f, kar\u015f\u0131 davas\u0131nda; ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 ihaleden sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131,davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 hi\u00e7bir hakka dayanmadan …<\/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-105025","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n