T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay <\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/p>\n
2017\/1141 E., 2017\/641 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 :\u0130cra Hukuk Mahkemesi<\/p>\n
Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201c\u015fikayet\u201d isteminden dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda Akhisar \u0130cra Hukuk Mahkemesince istemin usulden reddine dair 11\/12\/2013 g\u00fcn ve 2013\/239 E., 2013\/303 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun temyizi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesinin 06\/03\/2014 g\u00fcn ve 2014\/1688 E., 2014\/6465 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n
“\u2026Bor\u00e7lu, \u00e7ift\u00e7i oldu\u011funu, haczedilen gayrimenkullerden ge\u00e7imini temin etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek haczedilmezlik \u015fikayetinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
Haczedilmezlik \u015fikayetini ileri s\u00fcren bor\u00e7lunun bu iddias\u0131n\u0131 kan\u0131tlama y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ispat k\u00fclfeti kendisine aittir.<\/p>\n
Dava 24.09.2013 tarihinde, 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte iken a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’nun 114. madesinin “g” bendinde, gider avans\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 dava \u015fartlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 Kanun’un 115. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, mahkemenin bu ko\u015fulun mevcut olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131raca\u011f\u0131, ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise, bu \u015fart\u0131n noksanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilirse davan\u0131n usulden reddine karar verilece\u011fi \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
HMK’nun “Har\u00e7 ve Avans \u00d6demesi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 120. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 har\u00e7 ve avanslar\u0131n Bakanl\u0131k\u00e7a saptanaca\u011f\u0131, dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131laca\u011f\u0131, avans\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre verilece\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
“Delil ikamesi i\u00e7in avans” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 HMK’nun 324. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “taraflardan herbiri ikamesini talep etti\u011fi delil i\u00e7in mahkemece belirlenen avans\u0131, verilen kesin s\u00fcrede yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Taraflar birlikte ayn\u0131 delilin ikamesini talep etmi\u015flerse, gereken gideri yar\u0131 yar\u0131ya avans olarak \u00f6derler” h\u00fckm\u00fc d\u00fczenlendikten sonra, ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda; taraflar\u0131n bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc yerine getirmemeleri halinde talep ettikleri delilin ikamesinden vazge\u00e7mi\u015f say\u0131lacaklar\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00fczere HMK’nun 324. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen delil ikamesi avans\u0131, HMK’nun 114. maddesinin “g” bendinde belirtilen gider avans\u0131ndan h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 itibariyle farkl\u0131 olup, dava \u015fart\u0131 niteli\u011finde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
Somut olayda bor\u00e7lunun haczedilmezlik \u015fikayeti \u00fczerine mahkemece, bu hususta ke\u015fif yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve bilirki\u015fiden rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131 i\u00e7in 26.09.2013 tarihli tensip zapt\u0131n\u0131n 4 no’lu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 2. bendinde yer alan ara karar\u0131 ile, 850,00 TL.yi iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcrede yat\u0131rmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya s\u00fcre verilmesine, kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde yat\u0131r\u0131lmaz ise HMK’n\u0131n 120. maddesi gere\u011fi davan\u0131n usulden reddedilece\u011finin ihtar\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, tensip zapt\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131ya 18.11.2013 tarihinde tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Mahkemenin s\u00f6z konusu ara karar\u0131nda istenen avans\u0131n, ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi \u00fccreti oldu\u011fu belirtildi\u011finden, istenen avans delil ikamesi avans\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup, HMK’nun 324. maddesi gere\u011fince, bu avans\u0131n s\u00fcresinde yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonucu, delile dayanan taraf\u0131n o delilden vazge\u00e7mi\u015f say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Bu durumda mahkemece, ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn bor\u00e7luda oldu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131narak ve HMK’nun 324. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc de g\u00f6zetilerek mevcut delillere g\u00f6re haczedilmezlik \u015fikayeti hakk\u0131nda bir karar verilmesi gerekirken, i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7e ile davan\u0131n usulden reddi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 isabetsizdir\u2026”
\ngerek\u00e7esiyle bozularak dosya yerine geri \u00e7evrilmekle yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda mahkemece \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
HUKUK GENEL KURULU KARARI<\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulunca incelenerek direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcresinde temyiz edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131ktan ve dosyadaki k\u00e2\u011f\u0131tlar okunduktan sonra gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:
\n\u0130stem icra memurunun i\u015fleminin \u015fikayet yolu ile iptaline ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
\u015eikayet\u00e7i (bor\u00e7lu) kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u00e7a aleyhine y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen icra takibi \u00fczerine 1\/5 hisse itibariyle maliki oldu\u011fu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara haciz i\u015flemi uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu arazilerin \u0130cra \u0130flas Kanunu\u2019nun 82\/4 maddesi gere\u011fince haczi kabil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek haciz i\u015fleminin kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Kar\u015f\u0131 taraf (alacakl\u0131) vekili istemin s\u00fcresinde olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun ba\u015fkaca gelirinin ve kazanc\u0131n\u0131n olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fini belirterek \u015fikayetin reddine karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemece \u015fikayet dilek\u00e7esinde ke\u015fif ile bilirki\u015fi incelemesine dayan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u015fikayete konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n k\u0131smen \u00fczerinde yap\u0131 bulunan arsa ve tar\u0131m arazisi vasf\u0131nda olduklar\u0131, bu durumda ziraat, in\u015faat ve m\u00fclk uzmanlar\u0131ndan olu\u015fturulan bilirki\u015fi heyeti ile fen memuru bilirki\u015fi e\u015fli\u011finde ke\u015fif yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n 120. maddesine g\u00f6re \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan Bilirki\u015fi \u00dccret Tarifesine g\u00f6re bilirki\u015filer i\u00e7in \u0130cra Mahkemelerinde 150,00-TL \u00fccret takdir edilebilece\u011fi, bu durumda an\u0131lan tarife ile Gider Avans\u0131 Tarifesine g\u00f6re ke\u015fif \u00fccreti 245,00-TL ve d\u00f6rt bilirki\u015fi i\u00e7in 600,00-TL olmak \u00fczere toplam 845,00-TL tutar\u0131nda gider avans\u0131n\u0131n eksik yat\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu, eksik gider avans\u0131n\u0131n HMK’n\u0131n 114\/1-g ve 115\/1. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla verilen ara karar\u0131n \u015fikayet\u00e7iye usul\u00fcnce tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi, ara kararda gider avans\u0131 kalemlerinin tek tek g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi, yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 halinde davan\u0131n usulden reddedilebilece\u011fi hususu ile ilgili kanun maddelerinin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilerek gerekli ihtarat\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak \u015fikayet\u00e7inin de duru\u015fmada ikrar etti\u011fi \u00fczere verilen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde belirtilen eksik gider avans\u0131n\u0131 tamamlamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan \u015fikayetin usulden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fcn \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine \u00d6zel Dairece yukar\u0131da ba\u015fl\u0131k k\u0131sm\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeplerle bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Yerel Mahkemece \u00f6nceki gerek\u00e7elerle direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Direnme karar\u0131 \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lu taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Direnme yolu ile Hukuk Genel Kurulu \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k 26.09.2013 tarihli tensip tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u201cIV.Giderilmesi gerekli eksik hususlar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn 2.bendinde kurulan ara karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi i\u00e7in yat\u0131rmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen 850,00-TL\u2019nin gider avans\u0131 m\u0131 yoksa delil avans\u0131m\u0131 oldu\u011fu, buradan var\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re belirtilen bu giderin yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u015fikayetin usulden reddinin do\u011fru olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00d6ncelikle belirtilmelidir ki, bor\u00e7lunun haczedilmezlik \u015fikayetine ili\u015fkin ba\u015fvurusu \u0130\u0130K.nun 16. maddesine dayal\u0131d\u0131r. \u015eikayet \u0130cra ve \u0130flas Hukukuna \u00f6zg\u00fc bir kanun yolu olup, dava olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan Medeni Usul Hukukunda d\u00fczenlenen davaya ili\u015fkin kurallar ve bu anlamda HMK’n\u0131n gider avans\u0131na ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmleri \u015fikayetler hakk\u0131nda uygun d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde uygulan\u0131r.
\nBu a\u00e7\u0131klamadan sonra gider avans\u0131na ili\u015fkin yasal d\u00fczenleme ve ilkelerin ortaya konulmas\u0131nda yarar vard\u0131r:<\/p>\n
01.10.2011 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019nun 114\/g maddesinde gider avans\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
HMK\u2019nun \u201char\u00e7 ve avans \u00f6denmesi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 120. maddesinde;<\/p>\n
\u201c(1) Davac\u0131, yarg\u0131lama har\u00e7lar\u0131 ile her y\u0131l Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nca \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lacak gider avans\u0131 tarifesinde belirlenecek olan tutar\u0131, dava a\u00e7arken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
(2) Avans\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n dava s\u0131ras\u0131nda anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, mahkemece, bu eksikli\u011fin tamamlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre verilir.\u201d<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fc getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
An\u0131lan maddenin gerek\u00e7esinde ise: \u201cMadde ile, dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rken yarg\u0131lama har\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011fu d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Maddede ayr\u0131ca, 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunda yer almayan, yeni bir d\u00fczenleme yap\u0131larak, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tebligat \u00fccretleri, ke\u015fif giderleri, bilirki\u015fi ve tan\u0131k \u00fccretleri gibi giderleri kar\u015f\u0131layacak tutar\u0131n, avans olarak davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dava a\u00e7arken yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011fu getirilmi\u015ftir. Bu avans\u0131n yetmemesi durumunda ise tamamlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya kesin s\u00fcre verilece\u011fi hususu h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Avans miktar\u0131n\u0131n, davan\u0131n t\u00fcr\u00fc ve \u00f6zelliklerine g\u00f6re her y\u0131l Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nca il\u00e2n edilecek tarifeye g\u00f6re belirlenece\u011fi, maddede yer alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Maddede yap\u0131lan bu d\u00fczenlemeyle, gerekli masraflar\u0131n zaman\u0131nda yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 davalar\u0131n gecikmesinin \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ilmesi ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u201d ifadelerine yer verilmek suretiyle, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tebligat \u00fccretleri, ke\u015fif giderleri, bilirki\u015fi ve tan\u0131k \u00fccretleri gibi giderleri kar\u015f\u0131layacak tutar\u0131n, avans olarak davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dava a\u00e7arken yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011fu getirildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun \u201cdelil ikamesi i\u00e7in avans\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 324. maddesinde ise \u201c (1) Taraflardan her biri ikamesini talep etti\u011fi delil i\u00e7in mahkemece belirlenen avans\u0131, verilen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Taraflar birlikte ayn\u0131 delilin ikamesini talep etmi\u015flerse, gereken gideri yar\u0131 yar\u0131ya avans olarak \u00f6derler.<\/p>\n
(2) Taraflardan birisi avans y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmezse, di\u011fer taraf bu avans\u0131 yat\u0131rabilir. Aksi h\u00e2lde talep olunan delilin ikamesinden vazge\u00e7ilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n
(3) Taraflar\u0131n \u00fczerinde serbest\u00e7e tasarruf edemeyece\u011fi dava ve i\u015fler hakk\u0131ndaki h\u00fck\u00fcmler sakl\u0131d\u0131r.\u201d
\nH\u00fckm\u00fc getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
An\u0131lan madde gerek\u00e7esinde de: \u201char\u00e7 ve avans \u00f6denmesi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 125 inci maddede davac\u0131n\u0131n dava masraflar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 olarak avans \u00f6demesi \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu avans, davac\u0131n\u0131n delillerinin toplanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken harcamalar\u0131 da kapsar. Bu maddede ise daha \u00e7ok daval\u0131n\u0131n delillerinin toplanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6denmesi gereken avans d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan davac\u0131n\u0131n avans\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden \u201cdava \u015fartlar\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 119 uncu maddede h\u00fck\u00fcm getirilmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n avans\u0131 yat\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 dava \u015fartlar\u0131ndand\u0131r. \u015eu h\u00e2lde davac\u0131 avans\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131laman\u0131n devam\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda yetersiz kalmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, uygulanacak h\u00fck\u00fcm, bu maddeden ziyade 125 inci madde h\u00fckm\u00fcd\u00fcr\u2026\u201d ifadelerine yer verilmek suretiyle, gider avans\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n dava masraflar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla, delil avans\u0131n\u0131n ise daha \u00e7ok daval\u0131n\u0131n delillerinin toplanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla getirildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
03.04.2012 tarihli Resmi Gazete\u2019de yay\u0131nlanan Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Y\u00f6netmeli\u011finin 45. maddesinde: \u201c(1) Davac\u0131, yarg\u0131lama har\u00e7lar\u0131 ile her y\u0131l Bakanl\u0131k\u00e7a \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lacak gider avans\u0131 tarifesinde belirlenecek olan tutar\u0131 dava a\u00e7arken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Gider avans\u0131, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tebligat ve posta \u00fccretleri, ke\u015fif giderleri, bilirki\u015fi ve tan\u0131k \u00fccretleri gibi giderler i\u00e7in davac\u0131dan al\u0131nan mebla\u011f\u0131 ifade eder.<\/p>\n
(2) Adli yard\u0131m talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan dava ve i\u015flerde adli yard\u0131m konusunda bir karar verilinceye kadar har\u00e7, gider ve delil avans\u0131 al\u0131nmaz. Kanunlardaki \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmler sakl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
(3) Gider avans\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n dava s\u0131ras\u0131nda anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde, mahkemece bu eksikli\u011fin tamamlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre verilir. Dava \u015fart\u0131 olan gider avans\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 veya tamamlanmamas\u0131 halinde, dava, dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilir.<\/p>\n
(4) Taraflardan her biri ikamesini talep etti\u011fi delil i\u00e7in mahkemece belirlenen avans\u0131, verilen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Delil avans\u0131, taraflar\u0131n dayand\u0131klar\u0131 delillerin giderlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamak \u00fczere mahkemece belirlenen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde \u00f6demeleri gereken mebla\u011f\u0131 ifade eder. Taraflar birlikte ayn\u0131 delilin ikamesini talep etmi\u015flerse, gereken gideri yar\u0131 yar\u0131ya avans olarak \u00f6derler. Taraflardan biri avans y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmedi\u011finde, di\u011fer taraf bu avans\u0131 da yat\u0131rabilir. Delil avans\u0131n\u0131 yat\u0131rmayan taraf, o delilin ikamesinden vazge\u00e7mi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Taraflar\u0131n \u00fczerinde tasarruf edemeyecekleri dava ve i\u015flerle, kanunlardaki \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmler sakl\u0131d\u0131r\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n
H\u00fckm\u00fc getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fin 45. maddesinde gider avans\u0131 ve delil avans\u0131 birlikte d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olup, gider avans\u0131n\u0131n, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tebligat ve posta \u00fccretleri, ke\u015fif giderleri, bilirki\u015fi ve tan\u0131k \u00fccretleri gibi giderler i\u00e7in davac\u0131dan al\u0131nan mebla\u011f\u0131 ifade etti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n, her y\u0131l Bakanl\u0131k\u00e7a \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lacak gider avans\u0131 tarifesinde belirlenecek olan tutar\u0131 dava a\u00e7arken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131rmak zorunda oldu\u011fu, delil avans\u0131n\u0131n ise taraflar\u0131n dayand\u0131klar\u0131 delillerin giderlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamak \u00fczere mahkemece belirlenen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde \u00f6demeleri gereken mebla\u011f\u0131 ifade etti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
30.09.2011 tarihli Resmi Gazete\u2019de yay\u0131nlanan Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Gider Avans\u0131 Tarifesinin 1.maddesinde tarifenin amac\u0131n\u0131n; dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131lacak olan gider avans\u0131n\u0131n miktar\u0131 ile avans\u0131n \u00f6denmesine ili\u015fkin usul ve esaslar\u0131 belirlemek oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tarifenin 4 maddesinde gider avans\u0131 olarak, taraf say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n be\u015f kat\u0131 tutar\u0131nda tebligat gideri, dava dilek\u00e7esinde tan\u0131k deliline dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve tan\u0131k say\u0131s\u0131 belirlenmi\u015f ise tan\u0131k say\u0131s\u0131nca tan\u0131k asgari \u00fccreti ve tebligat gideri, tan\u0131k say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilmemi\u015f ise en az \u00fc\u00e7 tan\u0131k asgari \u00fccreti ve tebligat gideri, dava dilek\u00e7esinde ke\u015fif deliline dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise ke\u015fif harc\u0131 avans\u0131 ile birlikte 75,00-TL ula\u015f\u0131m gideri, dava dilek\u00e7esinde bilirki\u015fi deliline dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise Bilirki\u015fi \u00dccret Tarifesinde davan\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkeme i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen bilirki\u015fi \u00fccreti, di\u011fer i\u015f ve i\u015flemler i\u00e7in 50,00-TL’nin davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6denece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, Y\u00f6netmelikte gider avans\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7inde delil avans\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli giderler de g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. Gider avans\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 halinde a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilir (Y\u00f6n. m. 45\/3); delil avans\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 halinde ise, o delilden vazge\u00e7ilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. (Y\u00f6n. m. 45\/3). Bu durumda Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fin 45. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131 ile 4 ve 5 f\u0131kralar\u0131 aras\u0131nda uyum bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, HMK.\u2019nun 324. maddesi g\u00f6zetilerek Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fin 45. maddesinin 4. ve 5. f\u0131kralar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncelikle uygulanmas\u0131 gerekir (Pekcan\u0131tez H.\/Atalay O.\/ \u00d6zekes., M., Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu H\u00fck\u00fcmlerine G\u00f6re Medeni Usul Hukuku 13. Bas\u0131, Ankara 2012, s.354 ).<\/p>\n
Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yukar\u0131da belirtilen Y\u00f6netmelik h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 120. maddesindeki gider avans\u0131 ile ilgili d\u00fczenleme ve 324. maddedeki delil ikamesi i\u00e7in avans kural\u0131n\u0131n birlikte de\u011ferlendirilerek dava \u015fart\u0131 olan gider avans\u0131n\u0131n delillerin ikamesi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki yarg\u0131lama giderleri i\u00e7in dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131, tan\u0131k dinlenmesi, bilirki\u015fi raporu al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve ke\u015fif gideri gibi delil ikamesine y\u00f6nelik giderlerin ise gider avans\u0131 i\u00e7inde de\u011ferlendirilmemesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olaya gelince; bor\u00e7lunun haczedilmezlik \u015fikayeti \u00fczerine ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta 130,00-TL gider avans\u0131n\u0131n mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ard\u0131ndan mahkemece ke\u015fif yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve bilirki\u015fiden rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131 i\u00e7in 26.09.2013 tarihli tensip zapt\u0131n\u0131n 4 no’lu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 2. bendinde yer alan ara karar\u0131 ile, 850,00-TL.yi iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcrede yat\u0131rmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7luya s\u00fcre verildi\u011fi ve bu paran\u0131n kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde yat\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde HMK’n\u0131n 120. maddesi gere\u011fi istemin usulden reddedilece\u011finin ihtar\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun ise verilen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde belirtilen masraf\u0131 yat\u0131rmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u015fikayet isteminin usulden reddine karar verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de bilirki\u015fi ve ke\u015fif giderleri nedeniyle istenilecek giderlerin delil avans\u0131 kabul edilip, HMK\u2019n\u0131n 324. maddesi uygulanmak suretiyle sonuca gidilmesi gerekirken bu masraflar\u0131n gider avans\u0131 olarak kabul edilerek usulden ret karar\u0131 verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulunda yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda Y\u00f6netmelikte gider avans\u0131n\u0131n tek tek say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, gider avans\u0131n\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131 oldu\u011fu, kanunun amac\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 yorum yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131, somut olayda belirtilen ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi giderinin de gider avans\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde eksik masraf\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 sebebiyle verilen usulden red karar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011fu, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n onanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011funca benimsenmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
O halde yukar\u0131da belirtilen gerek\u00e7elerle Yerel Mahkemece bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 gerekirken, \u00f6nceki kararda direnmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7: \u015eikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen sebeplerle BOZULMASINA, istek halinde temyiz pe\u015fin harc\u0131n yat\u0131rana geri verilmesine karar d\u00fczeltme yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere 05.04.2017 tarihinde oy\u00e7oklu\u011fu ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
1-Dava, davac\u0131 bor\u00e7lu aleyhine daval\u0131 alacakl\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen icra takibinde, davac\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7imini sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in zaruri olan 1\/5 arazi hissesinin de haczedildi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla, yap\u0131lan haciz i\u015fleminin \u015fikayet yoluyla kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2-\u0130cra hakimli\u011fi, haczedilen arazinin gelir durumunun incelenmesi amac\u0131yla, davac\u0131n\u0131n da delil olarak dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi delilleriyle ilgili olarak, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n 114\/1-g, 115\/2 ve 120.maddeleri uyar\u0131nca, eksik yat\u0131r\u0131lan bilirki\u015fi ile ke\u015fif \u00fccretinin Bilirki\u015fi \u00dccret Tarifesine g\u00f6re tamamlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre vermi\u015f ve s\u00fcrenin sonunda yat\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde davan\u0131n usulden reddine karar verilece\u011fi ihtar\u0131na ra\u011fmen verilen s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde \u00fccret yat\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in davan\u0131n usulden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3-Y\u00fcksek Daire, \u201cHMK 114\/1-g maddesinde belirtilen gider avans\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 ile 324.maddesindeki delil ikamesi avans\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n birbirlerinden farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, istenen avans delil ikamesi avans\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup, HMK’nun 324. Maddesi gere\u011fince, bu avans\u0131n s\u00fcresinde yat\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonucu, delile dayanan taraf\u0131n o delilden vazge\u00e7mi\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken, esasa girilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyle davan\u0131n reddi do\u011fru olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
4-Davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta yat\u0131rmas\u0131 gerekli gider avans\u0131 HMK 114\/1 (g) maddesi uyar\u0131nca, dava \u015fartlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Temel ama\u00e7, yarg\u0131lama faaliyetinde ya\u015fanan gecikmelerin \u00f6nlenmesi ve b\u00f6ylelikle masraf yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 hususunda ya\u015fanan gecikme s\u00fcrelerinin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131larak zaman\u0131nda karar verilmesi sa\u011flanmak suretiyle adil yarg\u0131lanma ilkesine hizmet etmektir.<\/p>\n
5-Gider avans\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7erisine hangi kalemlerin girdi\u011fi hususu yasada a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a say\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da, HMK m. 120 de \u201c(1) Davac\u0131, yarg\u0131lama har\u00e7lar\u0131 ile her y\u0131l Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nca \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lacak gider avans\u0131 tarifesinde belirlenecek olan tutar\u0131, dava a\u00e7arken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. (2) Avans\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n dava s\u0131ras\u0131nda anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde, mahkemece, bu eksikli\u011fin tamamlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre verilir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, kanun koyucu gider avans\u0131n\u0131n neler oldu\u011funu belirleme yetki ve g\u00f6revini Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na verdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6-Nitekim 6100 S. HMK\u2019n\u0131n uygulanma \u015feklini g\u00f6steren ve Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131larak 06.06.2015 T. RG\u2019de yay\u0131nlanan \u201cB\u00f6lge Adliye ve Adli Yarg\u0131 \u0130lk Derece Mahkemeleri ile Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131 \u0130dari ve Yaz\u0131 \u0130\u015fleri Hizmetlerinin Y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine Dair Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fin m. 45 te \u201cGider avans\u0131, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tebligat ve posta \u00fccretleri, ke\u015fif giderleri, bilirki\u015fi ve tan\u0131k \u00fccretleri gibi giderler i\u00e7in davac\u0131dan al\u0131nan mebla\u011f\u0131 ifade eder\u201d \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemede, a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a, ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi \u00fccretinin gider avans\u0131 kalemleri aras\u0131nda oldu\u011fu kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7-Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan 2016 y\u0131l\u0131 HMK Gider Avans\u0131 Tarifesi m. 3\u2019de de, ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi \u00fccreti, gider avans\u0131 kalemleri aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8-Her ne kadar Y\u00fcksek Daire ile HGK\u2019n\u0131n say\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funluk \u00fcyeleri, HMK m. 324\u2019te yer alan;<\/p>\n
\u201c(1) Taraflardan her biri ikamesini talep etti\u011fi delil i\u00e7in mahkemece belirlenen avans\u0131, verilen kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Taraflar birlikte ayn\u0131 delilin ikamesini talep etmi\u015flerse, gereken gideri yar\u0131 yar\u0131ya avans olarak \u00f6derler.<\/p>\n
(2)Taraflardan birisi avans y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmezse, di\u011fer taraf bu avans\u0131 yat\u0131rabilir. Aksi h\u00e2lde talep olunan delilin ikamesinden vazge\u00e7ilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n
(3)Taraflar\u0131n \u00fczerinde serbest\u00e7e tasarruf edemeyece\u011fi dava ve i\u015fler hakk\u0131ndaki h\u00fck\u00fcmler sakl\u0131d\u0131r\u201d
\n\u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemeye dayanarak, ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi \u00fccretinin delil avans\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu kabul etmi\u015f ise de, maddenin gerek\u00e7esinde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a; \u201cHAR\u00c7 VE AVANS \u00d6DENMES\u0130” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 125. (taslakta 125, ger\u00e7ekte 120) maddesinde, davac\u0131n\u0131n dava masraflar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen avans\u0131n, davac\u0131n\u0131n delillerinin toplanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken harcamalar\u0131 da kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu maddede (HMK m. 324) ise daha \u00e7ok daval\u0131n\u0131n delillerinin toplanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6demesi gereken avans\u0131n d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n avans\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden “Dava \u015fartlar\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 119. (taslakta 119, ger\u00e7ekte 114) maddesinde h\u00fck\u00fcm getirildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n avans\u0131 yat\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n bir dava \u015fart\u0131 oldu\u011fu, hatta davac\u0131 avans\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131laman\u0131n devam\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda yetersiz kalmas\u0131 halinde de, uygulanacak h\u00fckm\u00fcn, bu maddeden ziyade 125. (taslakta 125, ger\u00e7ekte 120) madde h\u00fckm\u00fc oldu\u011fu ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9- \u00d6\u011fretide (Pekcan\u0131tez, Atalay, HMK, 2017 s.935 vd., 2399 vd.) ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m yarg\u0131 uygulamalar\u0131nda, Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan Y\u00f6netmelik ve Tarife h\u00fck\u00fcmleri ele\u015ftirilmekte ise de, s\u00f6z konusu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerin kanun koyucunun a\u00e7\u0131k tercihlerine tezat oldu\u011fu, zira gider avans\u0131n\u0131n sadece tebligatlar i\u00e7in de\u011fil, delillerin toplanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in de al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011finin HMK 324.maddesi gerek\u00e7esinde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ifade edildi\u011fi, tasvip edilmese dahi yarg\u0131 yerlerinin pozitif d\u00fczenlemeleri uygulamak zorunda oldu\u011fu kanaatindeyim.<\/p>\n
An\u0131lan nedenlerle, mevcut pozitif d\u00fczenlemeler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, yerel mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n son derece yerinde oldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nun say\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011funun g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerine kat\u0131lm\u0131yorum.<\/p>\n
\u200bYarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu’nun 05.04.2017 tarihli, 2017\/1141 Esas, 2017\/641 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\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\/1141 E., 2017\/641 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” MAHKEMES\u0130 :\u0130cra Hukuk Mahkemesi Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201c\u015fikayet\u201d isteminden dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda Akhisar \u0130cra Hukuk Mahkemesince istemin usulden reddine dair 11\/12\/2013 g\u00fcn ve 2013\/239 E., 2013\/303 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar \u015fikayet\u00e7i bor\u00e7lunun temyizi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesinin 06\/03\/2014 g\u00fcn ve 2014\/1688 E., 2014\/6465 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile; “\u2026Bor\u00e7lu, \u00e7ift\u00e7i oldu\u011funu, haczedilen gayrimenkullerden ge\u00e7imini temin etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek haczedilmezlik \u015fikayetinde bulunmu\u015ftur. Haczedilmezlik \u015fikayetini ileri s\u00fcren bor\u00e7lunun bu iddias\u0131n\u0131 kan\u0131tlama y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ispat k\u00fclfeti kendisine aittir. Dava 24.09.2013 tarihinde, 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte iken a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’nun 114. madesinin “g” bendinde, gider avans\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 dava \u015fartlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 Kanun’un 115. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, mahkemenin bu ko\u015fulun mevcut olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131raca\u011f\u0131, ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise, bu \u015fart\u0131n noksanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilirse davan\u0131n usulden reddine karar verilece\u011fi \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. HMK’nun “Har\u00e7 ve Avans \u00d6demesi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 120. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 har\u00e7 ve avanslar\u0131n Bakanl\u0131k\u00e7a saptanaca\u011f\u0131, dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rken mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131laca\u011f\u0131, avans\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda davac\u0131ya iki haftal\u0131k kesin s\u00fcre verilece\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. “Delil ikamesi i\u00e7in avans” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 HMK’nun 324. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “taraflardan herbiri ikamesini talep etti\u011fi delil i\u00e7in mahkemece belirlenen avans\u0131, verilen kesin s\u00fcrede yat\u0131rmak zorundad\u0131r. Taraflar birlikte ayn\u0131 delilin ikamesini talep etmi\u015flerse, …<\/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-89679","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n