Miras ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fan elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyet, paylar\u0131n belirli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, maliklerin ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerinde hep birlikte hak sahibi olduklar\u0131 bir m\u00fclkiyet t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu yap\u0131, miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel tasarruflar\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, sat\u0131\u015f, in\u015faat, ipotek ve hukuki i\u015flemlerde de \u00f6nemli engellere yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. Bu sebeple, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, hem ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n ekonomiye kazand\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 hem de miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kritik bir i\u015flemdir. Uygulamada ise bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcn hangi usullerle yap\u0131labilece\u011fi, hangi hallerde dava a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu oldu\u011fu ve hangi durumlar\u0131n idari yolla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclebilece\u011fi hususunda ciddi teredd\u00fctler ya\u015fanmaktad\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu makalede; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi ile 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kadastro Kanunu\u2019nun Ek 3. maddesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin yollar\u0131, dava \u015fartlar\u0131, zorunlu arabuluculuk tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131, aktif husumet ve taraf te\u015fkili gibi teknik meseleler Yarg\u0131tay ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131 \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda detayl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde ele al\u0131nacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
A) KADASTRO KANUNU EK MADDE 3 UYARINCA ELB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130 M\u00dcLK\u0130YET\u0130N TEK TARAFLI TALEP VE TEBL\u0130GATLA PAYLI M\u00dcLK\u0130YETE D\u00d6N\u00dc\u015eT\u00dcR\u00dcLMES\u0130<\/p>\n
Miras yoluyla kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla veya tek bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine tapuda tescil edilebilir. Tek miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n talebinde elbirli\u011fi (i\u015ftirak) m\u00fclkiyeti esas al\u0131n\u0131rken, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar birlikte ba\u015fvurursa veya payl\u0131 (m\u00fc\u015fterek) m\u00fclkiyeti a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a kabul ederlerse, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz payl\u0131 olarak tescil edilir. Ayr\u0131ca, yeni d\u00fczenlemelerle birlikte bir miras\u00e7\u0131, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131yla elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesini talep edebilir. Tebligat yap\u0131lan miras\u00e7\u0131lar 30 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde itiraz etmez veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7mazsa, tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc re\u2019sen payl\u0131 tescil i\u015flemini tamamlar. Ancak veraset belgeleri uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k i\u00e7eriyorsa, itiraz varsa veya tebligat giderleri kar\u015f\u0131lanmazsa i\u015flem yap\u0131lamaz.<\/p>\n
B) PAYLI M\u00dcLK\u0130YETE \u00c7EV\u0130RME DAVASI<\/p>\n
Medeni Kanun Madde 644\u2019E G\u00f6re Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilmesi, Ancak T\u00fcm Miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n Kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla Tapuda Yap\u0131lacak Bir S\u00f6zle\u015fme veya Bir Miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinde A\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131 Dava Sonucunda M\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2022\/6973, K. 2024\/160, T. 15.01.2024<\/p>\n
4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 644. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, bir miras\u00e7\u0131, terekeye dahil mallar \u00fczerindeki elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesini talep edebilir. Mahkeme, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 yaparak belirleyece\u011fi s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 bildirmeye davet eder. E\u011fer bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmez veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmazsa, h\u00e2kim m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesine karar verir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya \u00c7evrilmesi Davas\u0131n\u0131 Kimler A\u00e7abilir?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2021\/639, K. 2021\/2981, T. 11.11.2021\u2028Bursa BAM, 4. HD., E. 2020\/554, K. 2020\/1425, T. 24.11.2020<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davas\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7ma hakk\u0131, yaln\u0131zca ta\u015f\u0131nmazda malik s\u0131fat\u0131yla yer alan miras\u00e7\u0131lara ve \u0130\u0130K m.121 uyar\u0131nca icra hakimli\u011finden yetki belgesi alm\u0131\u015f alacakl\u0131lara aittir. Bu \u015fartlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan ki\u015filer \u2014 \u00f6rne\u011fin miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devralan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer ya da sat\u0131\u015f vaadi alacakl\u0131lar\u0131 \u2014 bu davay\u0131 a\u00e7amaz. Tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131nda verilen yetki belgeleri, bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm talebi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli say\u0131lmaz. Yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda, bu ki\u015filerin a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 davalar aktif husumet yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle reddedilmi\u015f, davay\u0131 a\u00e7abilecek ki\u015fi grubunun s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a \u00e7izilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Davalar\u0131nda Zorunlu Dava Arkada\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Taraf Te\u015fkili Esast\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2018\/2772, K. 2021\/4361, T. 28.06.2021<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davas\u0131, t\u00fcm ortaklar\u0131 do\u011frudan ilgilendiren, iki tarafl\u0131 ve benzer sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furan bir davad\u0131r. Bu nedenle zorunlu dava arkada\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6z konusudur. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, sulh hakimi di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131da bulunarak, belirlenen s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 bildirmeye davet eder. \u0130tiraz edilmez ya da payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmazsa, h\u00e2kim m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcne karar verir. Bu s\u00fcrecin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in, miras\u00e7\u0131lara g\u00f6nderilecek davetiyede bu hususun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmesi ve t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n davada taraf olarak yer almas\u0131 zorunludur. Somut olayda, tapuda kay\u0131tl\u0131 bir payda\u015f\u0131n davaya dahil edilmedi\u011fi ve hatta \u00f6l\u00fc olmas\u0131 ihtimaline ra\u011fmen miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n da dosyaya dahil edilmedi\u011fi tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Bu eksiklik nedeniyle Yarg\u0131tay, taraf te\u015fkili sa\u011flanmaks\u0131z\u0131n verilen karar\u0131n usule ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funa h\u00fckmederek bozma karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
TMK m.644 Uyar\u0131nca Miras\u00e7\u0131lara Yap\u0131lacak Tebligatta Me\u015fruhat Verilmesi Zorunludur<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 2. HD., E. 2006\/3390, K. 2006\/10400, T. 29.06.2006<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davalar\u0131nda, TMK m.644 gere\u011fi di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara g\u00f6nderilen dava dilek\u00e7esi ve duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc bildiriminde, \u201cbelirlenen s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011fi veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclece\u011fi\u201d a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a yaz\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay, bu bilgilendirmenin yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131 davan\u0131n sonucuna etki edecek bir usul hatas\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya \u00c7evrilmesinde Arabuluculuk \u015eart\u0131 Var M\u0131d\u0131r?<\/p>\n
Konya BAM, 4. HD., E. 2024\/5723, K. 2024\/5472, T. 26.12.2024\u2028\u0130stanbul BAM, 49. HD., E. 2024\/4950, K. 2025\/156, T. 29.01.2025<\/p>\n
Konya BAM, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131 6325 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 18\/B maddesi kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirerek, arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmadan a\u00e7\u0131lan davay\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle reddetmi\u015ftir. Ancak yakla\u015f\u0131k bir ay sonra verilen \u0130stanbul BAM karar\u0131nda, bu dava t\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn payla\u015f\u0131m davas\u0131 niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131, 18\/B\u2019de a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve zorunlu arabuluculuk \u015fart\u0131na tabi tutulamayaca\u011f\u0131 vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Her iki karar\u0131n yak\u0131n tarihli olmas\u0131, yarg\u0131 i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda s\u00fcreklilik sorunu do\u011furmakta; \u00f6zellikle davac\u0131 taraflar a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan hukuki \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilirli\u011fi zay\u0131flatmaktad\u0131r. \u0130stanbul BAM\u2019\u0131n yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131, hem TMK m.644\u2019\u00fcn sistemati\u011fine hem de numerus clausus ilkesine daha uygun d\u00fc\u015fmektedir. Ancak hak kayb\u0131 ya\u015fanmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in davay\u0131 a\u00e7madan \u00f6nce arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin i\u015fletilmesini tavsiye ederiz.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Davalar\u0131nda G\u00f6revli Mahkeme Neresidir?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2018\/4363, K. 2021\/3137, T. 28.04.2021<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi hususunda, 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kadastro Kanunu\u2019na eklenen Ek 3. maddeyle tapu sicil m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerine idari bir yol tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olsa da, bu d\u00fczenleme 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesini y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckten kald\u0131rmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, bir miras\u00e7\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan ve yarg\u0131 karar\u0131yla elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya \u00e7evrilmesinin talep edildi\u011fi durumlarda g\u00f6revli mahkeme halen sulh hukuk mahkemesidir.<\/p>\n
Ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Giderilmesi Davas\u0131 A\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyet Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilebilir Mi?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2023\/482, K. 2023\/2805, T. 24.05.2023\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 6. HD., E. 2012\/5495, K. 2012\/7913, T. 28.05.2012\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2024\/569, K. 2024\/1723, T. 25.03.2024\u2028Sakarya BAM, 7. HD., E. 2021\/2053, K. 2021\/2271, T. 24.12.2021<\/p>\n
T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi talebi, ancak payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015fsa ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ili\u015fkin olarak daha \u00f6nce a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131 varsa, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin sona erdirilmesi s\u00fcreci art\u0131k bu dava \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fcr ve ayr\u0131ca payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme karar\u0131 verilemez. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re, ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza y\u00f6nelik a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve derdest olan ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131, TMK m.644\/2 uyar\u0131nca d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme talebini engeller. Ancak bu engelin hukuken dikkate al\u0131nabilmesi i\u00e7in ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair belgenin dosyaya sunulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksi takdirde, s\u0131rf beyanla yap\u0131lan itirazlar, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131na y\u00f6nelik hakl\u0131 sebep say\u0131lmaz ve d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme davas\u0131 reddedilemez.<\/p>\n
Vasiyetnamenin \u0130ptali Davas\u0131 Sonu\u00e7lanmadan Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Hakk\u0131nda Karar Verilebilir Mi?<\/p>\n
Samsun BAM, 6. HD., E. 2020\/1378, K. 2020\/2175, T. 19.10.2020<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi talebi, terekeye ili\u015fkin haklar\u0131n kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ko\u015fuluna ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Vasiyetnamenin iptali davas\u0131 devam ederken, miras\u0131n kimlere ve ne \u015fekilde intikal edece\u011fi kesinle\u015fmemi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu durumda mahkeme, vasiyetnamenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi kesinle\u015fmeden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyet yap\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirecek bir karar veremez.<\/p>\n
Hangi \u0130tirazlar Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilmesini Engeller.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2022\/4859, K. 2022\/5880, T. 06.10.2022<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi davas\u0131nda, miras\u00e7\u0131lara yap\u0131lan tebligatta sadece \u201citiraz ettim\u201d demek yeterli de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131tay, bu itiraz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 g\u00f6sterecek bir sebebe dayanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgulamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Somut \u00f6rnek: Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda h\u00e2len s\u00fcren ortak bir i\u015fletme, tar\u0131m faaliyeti ya da aile \u015firketi varsa ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bu faaliyet i\u00e7in kullan\u0131l\u0131yorsa, bu durum elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131 i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli bir gerek\u00e7e olabilir.<\/p>\n
Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, \u201cistemiyorum\u201d ya da \u201c\u015fimdilik uygun de\u011fil\u201d gibi gerek\u00e7esiz ve ki\u015fisel itirazlar ge\u00e7erli say\u0131lmaz. Mahkeme, bu t\u00fcr dayanaks\u0131z itirazlar\u0131 dikkate almaz ve m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131ya \u00e7evirir.<\/p>\n
Vasiyetin \u0130nfaz\u0131 \u0130\u00e7in Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Gerekliyse, H\u00e2kim Davac\u0131ya S\u00fcre Vermelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 3. HD., E. 2021\/5520, K. 2021\/8706, T. 21.09.2021<\/p>\n
Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n elbirli\u011fi h\u00e2linde malik oldu\u011fu bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz vasiyetnameye konu olmu\u015fsa, vasiyetin uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle bu m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya \u00e7evrilmesi gerekir. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm yap\u0131lmadan verilecek karar\u0131n infaz\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Bu durumda h\u00e2kim, vasiyetin infaz\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131ya \u00e7evirmesi amac\u0131yla dava a\u00e7mas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre vermeli ve bu konuyu bekletici mesele olarak de\u011ferlendirmelidir. Bu yap\u0131lmadan verilen karar usul hatas\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyet Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmeden Vasiyetin Tenfizi Karar\u0131 Verilemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 3. HD., E. 2015\/1587, K. 2015\/20903, T. 23.12.2015<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, vasiyetnamenin tenfizi davas\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmadan \u00f6nce vasiyet konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n terekeye ait oldu\u011funun belirlenmesini ve verilecek karar\u0131n infazda teredd\u00fct yaratmayacak a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131kta olmas\u0131n\u0131 \u015fart ko\u015fmu\u015ftur. E\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131nmaz elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyete tabi ise, payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmeden vasiyetin infaz\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Bu durumda h\u00e2kim, davac\u0131ya elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi i\u00e7in s\u00fcre ve yetki vermeli, ard\u0131ndan olu\u015facak duruma g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aksi takdirde verilen karar uygulanamaz h\u00e2le gelir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7 :<\/p>\n
Miras\u0131n elbirli\u011fi h\u00e2linde s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, ge\u00e7mi\u015fin ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 temsil etse de gelece\u011fe ait bireysel tasarruflar\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcnde \u00e7o\u011fu zaman g\u00f6r\u00fcnmeyen bir engel gibi durmaktad\u0131r. Ekonomik i\u015flevsellikten hukuki i\u015flem kolayl\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yat\u0131r\u0131m kabiliyetinden m\u00fclkiyetin etkin kullan\u0131m\u0131na kadar bir\u00e7ok alanda elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 hem miras\u00e7\u0131lar hem de hukuk uygulay\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken teknik bir d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm h\u00e2line gelmi\u015ftir. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi ve Kadastro Kanunu\u2019nun Ek 3. maddesi bu d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fc \u00e7\u00f6zebilmek i\u00e7in iki ayr\u0131 fakat birbiriyle b\u00fct\u00fcnle\u015fen yol sunar: biri yarg\u0131sal m\u00fcdahale ile hakk\u0131n tesisi, di\u011feri idari kolayl\u0131kla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn prati\u011fe d\u00f6k\u00fclmesi.<\/p>\n
\u200bMiras ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fan elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyet, paylar\u0131n belirli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, maliklerin ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerinde hep birlikte hak sahibi olduklar\u0131 bir m\u00fclkiyet t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu yap\u0131, miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel tasarruflar\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, sat\u0131\u015f, in\u015faat, ipotek ve hukuki i\u015flemlerde de \u00f6nemli engellere yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. Bu sebeple, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, hem ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n ekonomiye kazand\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 hem de miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kritik bir i\u015flemdir. Uygulamada ise bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcn hangi usullerle yap\u0131labilece\u011fi, hangi hallerde dava a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu oldu\u011fu ve hangi durumlar\u0131n idari yolla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclebilece\u011fi hususunda ciddi teredd\u00fctler ya\u015fanmaktad\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu makalede; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi ile 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kadastro Kanunu\u2019nun Ek 3. maddesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin yollar\u0131, dava \u015fartlar\u0131, zorunlu arabuluculuk tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131, aktif husumet ve taraf te\u015fkili gibi teknik meseleler Yarg\u0131tay ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131 \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda detayl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde ele al\u0131nacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
A) KADASTRO KANUNU EK MADDE 3 UYARINCA ELB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130 M\u00dcLK\u0130YET\u0130N TEK TARAFLI TALEP VE TEBL\u0130GATLA PAYLI M\u00dcLK\u0130YETE D\u00d6N\u00dc\u015eT\u00dcR\u00dcLMES\u0130<\/p>\n
Miras yoluyla kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla veya tek bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine tapuda tescil edilebilir. Tek miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n talebinde elbirli\u011fi (i\u015ftirak) m\u00fclkiyeti esas al\u0131n\u0131rken, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar birlikte ba\u015fvurursa veya payl\u0131 (m\u00fc\u015fterek) m\u00fclkiyeti a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a kabul ederlerse, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz payl\u0131 olarak tescil edilir. Ayr\u0131ca, yeni d\u00fczenlemelerle birlikte bir miras\u00e7\u0131, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131yla elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesini talep edebilir. Tebligat yap\u0131lan miras\u00e7\u0131lar 30 g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde itiraz etmez veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7mazsa, tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc re\u2019sen payl\u0131 tescil i\u015flemini tamamlar. Ancak veraset belgeleri uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k i\u00e7eriyorsa, itiraz varsa veya tebligat giderleri kar\u015f\u0131lanmazsa i\u015flem yap\u0131lamaz.<\/p>\n
B) PAYLI M\u00dcLK\u0130YETE \u00c7EV\u0130RME DAVASI<\/p>\n
Medeni Kanun Madde 644\u2019E G\u00f6re Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilmesi, Ancak T\u00fcm Miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n Kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla Tapuda Yap\u0131lacak Bir S\u00f6zle\u015fme veya Bir Miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesinde A\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131 Dava Sonucunda M\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2022\/6973, K. 2024\/160, T. 15.01.2024<\/p>\n
4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 644. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, bir miras\u00e7\u0131, terekeye dahil mallar \u00fczerindeki elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesini talep edebilir. Mahkeme, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 yaparak belirleyece\u011fi s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 bildirmeye davet eder. E\u011fer bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmez veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmazsa, h\u00e2kim m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesine karar verir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya \u00c7evrilmesi Davas\u0131n\u0131 Kimler A\u00e7abilir?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2021\/639, K. 2021\/2981, T. 11.11.2021\u2028Bursa BAM, 4. HD., E. 2020\/554, K. 2020\/1425, T. 24.11.2020<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davas\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7ma hakk\u0131, yaln\u0131zca ta\u015f\u0131nmazda malik s\u0131fat\u0131yla yer alan miras\u00e7\u0131lara ve \u0130\u0130K m.121 uyar\u0131nca icra hakimli\u011finden yetki belgesi alm\u0131\u015f alacakl\u0131lara aittir. Bu \u015fartlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan ki\u015filer \u2014 \u00f6rne\u011fin miras pay\u0131n\u0131 devralan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer ya da sat\u0131\u015f vaadi alacakl\u0131lar\u0131 \u2014 bu davay\u0131 a\u00e7amaz. Tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131nda verilen yetki belgeleri, bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm talebi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli say\u0131lmaz. Yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda, bu ki\u015filerin a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 davalar aktif husumet yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle reddedilmi\u015f, davay\u0131 a\u00e7abilecek ki\u015fi grubunun s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a \u00e7izilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Davalar\u0131nda Zorunlu Dava Arkada\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Taraf Te\u015fkili Esast\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2018\/2772, K. 2021\/4361, T. 28.06.2021<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davas\u0131, t\u00fcm ortaklar\u0131 do\u011frudan ilgilendiren, iki tarafl\u0131 ve benzer sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furan bir davad\u0131r. Bu nedenle zorunlu dava arkada\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6z konusudur. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, sulh hakimi di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131da bulunarak, belirlenen s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 bildirmeye davet eder. \u0130tiraz edilmez ya da payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmazsa, h\u00e2kim m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcne karar verir. Bu s\u00fcrecin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in, miras\u00e7\u0131lara g\u00f6nderilecek davetiyede bu hususun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmesi ve t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n davada taraf olarak yer almas\u0131 zorunludur. Somut olayda, tapuda kay\u0131tl\u0131 bir payda\u015f\u0131n davaya dahil edilmedi\u011fi ve hatta \u00f6l\u00fc olmas\u0131 ihtimaline ra\u011fmen miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n da dosyaya dahil edilmedi\u011fi tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Bu eksiklik nedeniyle Yarg\u0131tay, taraf te\u015fkili sa\u011flanmaks\u0131z\u0131n verilen karar\u0131n usule ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funa h\u00fckmederek bozma karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
TMK m.644 Uyar\u0131nca Miras\u00e7\u0131lara Yap\u0131lacak Tebligatta Me\u015fruhat Verilmesi Zorunludur<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 2. HD., E. 2006\/3390, K. 2006\/10400, T. 29.06.2006<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi davalar\u0131nda, TMK m.644 gere\u011fi di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara g\u00f6nderilen dava dilek\u00e7esi ve duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc bildiriminde, \u201cbelirlenen s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011fi veya payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclece\u011fi\u201d a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a yaz\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay, bu bilgilendirmenin yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131 davan\u0131n sonucuna etki edecek bir usul hatas\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya \u00c7evrilmesinde Arabuluculuk \u015eart\u0131 Var M\u0131d\u0131r?<\/p>\n
Konya BAM, 4. HD., E. 2024\/5723, K. 2024\/5472, T. 26.12.2024\u2028\u0130stanbul BAM, 49. HD., E. 2024\/4950, K. 2025\/156, T. 29.01.2025<\/p>\n
Konya BAM, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131 6325 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 18\/B maddesi kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirerek, arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmadan a\u00e7\u0131lan davay\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle reddetmi\u015ftir. Ancak yakla\u015f\u0131k bir ay sonra verilen \u0130stanbul BAM karar\u0131nda, bu dava t\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn payla\u015f\u0131m davas\u0131 niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131, 18\/B\u2019de a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve zorunlu arabuluculuk \u015fart\u0131na tabi tutulamayaca\u011f\u0131 vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Her iki karar\u0131n yak\u0131n tarihli olmas\u0131, yarg\u0131 i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda s\u00fcreklilik sorunu do\u011furmakta; \u00f6zellikle davac\u0131 taraflar a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan hukuki \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilirli\u011fi zay\u0131flatmaktad\u0131r. \u0130stanbul BAM\u2019\u0131n yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131, hem TMK m.644\u2019\u00fcn sistemati\u011fine hem de numerus clausus ilkesine daha uygun d\u00fc\u015fmektedir. Ancak hak kayb\u0131 ya\u015fanmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in davay\u0131 a\u00e7madan \u00f6nce arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin i\u015fletilmesini tavsiye ederiz.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Davalar\u0131nda G\u00f6revli Mahkeme Neresidir?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2018\/4363, K. 2021\/3137, T. 28.04.2021<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi hususunda, 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kadastro Kanunu\u2019na eklenen Ek 3. maddeyle tapu sicil m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerine idari bir yol tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olsa da, bu d\u00fczenleme 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesini y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckten kald\u0131rmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, bir miras\u00e7\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan ve yarg\u0131 karar\u0131yla elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya \u00e7evrilmesinin talep edildi\u011fi durumlarda g\u00f6revli mahkeme halen sulh hukuk mahkemesidir.<\/p>\n
Ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Giderilmesi Davas\u0131 A\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyet Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilebilir Mi?<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2023\/482, K. 2023\/2805, T. 24.05.2023\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 6. HD., E. 2012\/5495, K. 2012\/7913, T. 28.05.2012\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2024\/569, K. 2024\/1723, T. 25.03.2024\u2028Sakarya BAM, 7. HD., E. 2021\/2053, K. 2021\/2271, T. 24.12.2021<\/p>\n
T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi talebi, ancak payla\u015fma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015fsa ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ili\u015fkin olarak daha \u00f6nce a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131 varsa, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin sona erdirilmesi s\u00fcreci art\u0131k bu dava \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fcr ve ayr\u0131ca payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme karar\u0131 verilemez. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re, ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaza y\u00f6nelik a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve derdest olan ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131, TMK m.644\/2 uyar\u0131nca d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme talebini engeller. Ancak bu engelin hukuken dikkate al\u0131nabilmesi i\u00e7in ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair belgenin dosyaya sunulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksi takdirde, s\u0131rf beyanla yap\u0131lan itirazlar, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131na y\u00f6nelik hakl\u0131 sebep say\u0131lmaz ve d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme davas\u0131 reddedilemez.<\/p>\n
Vasiyetnamenin \u0130ptali Davas\u0131 Sonu\u00e7lanmadan Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Hakk\u0131nda Karar Verilebilir Mi?<\/p>\n
Samsun BAM, 6. HD., E. 2020\/1378, K. 2020\/2175, T. 19.10.2020<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi talebi, terekeye ili\u015fkin haklar\u0131n kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ko\u015fuluna ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Vasiyetnamenin iptali davas\u0131 devam ederken, miras\u0131n kimlere ve ne \u015fekilde intikal edece\u011fi kesinle\u015fmemi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu durumda mahkeme, vasiyetnamenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi kesinle\u015fmeden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyet yap\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirecek bir karar veremez.<\/p>\n
Hangi \u0130tirazlar Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyete \u00c7evrilmesini Engeller.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 7. HD., E. 2022\/4859, K. 2022\/5880, T. 06.10.2022<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi davas\u0131nda, miras\u00e7\u0131lara yap\u0131lan tebligatta sadece \u201citiraz ettim\u201d demek yeterli de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131tay, bu itiraz\u0131n elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 g\u00f6sterecek bir sebebe dayanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgulamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Somut \u00f6rnek: Miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131nda h\u00e2len s\u00fcren ortak bir i\u015fletme, tar\u0131m faaliyeti ya da aile \u015firketi varsa ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bu faaliyet i\u00e7in kullan\u0131l\u0131yorsa, bu durum elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin devam\u0131 i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli bir gerek\u00e7e olabilir.<\/p>\n
Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, \u201cistemiyorum\u201d ya da \u201c\u015fimdilik uygun de\u011fil\u201d gibi gerek\u00e7esiz ve ki\u015fisel itirazlar ge\u00e7erli say\u0131lmaz. Mahkeme, bu t\u00fcr dayanaks\u0131z itirazlar\u0131 dikkate almaz ve m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131ya \u00e7evirir.<\/p>\n
Vasiyetin \u0130nfaz\u0131 \u0130\u00e7in Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyetin Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi Gerekliyse, H\u00e2kim Davac\u0131ya S\u00fcre Vermelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 3. HD., E. 2021\/5520, K. 2021\/8706, T. 21.09.2021<\/p>\n
Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n elbirli\u011fi h\u00e2linde malik oldu\u011fu bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz vasiyetnameye konu olmu\u015fsa, vasiyetin uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle bu m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131ya \u00e7evrilmesi gerekir. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm yap\u0131lmadan verilecek karar\u0131n infaz\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Bu durumda h\u00e2kim, vasiyetin infaz\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti payl\u0131ya \u00e7evirmesi amac\u0131yla dava a\u00e7mas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre vermeli ve bu konuyu bekletici mesele olarak de\u011ferlendirmelidir. Bu yap\u0131lmadan verilen karar usul hatas\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Elbirli\u011fi M\u00fclkiyet Payl\u0131ya D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmeden Vasiyetin Tenfizi Karar\u0131 Verilemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 3. HD., E. 2015\/1587, K. 2015\/20903, T. 23.12.2015<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, vasiyetnamenin tenfizi davas\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmadan \u00f6nce vasiyet konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n terekeye ait oldu\u011funun belirlenmesini ve verilecek karar\u0131n infazda teredd\u00fct yaratmayacak a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131kta olmas\u0131n\u0131 \u015fart ko\u015fmu\u015ftur. E\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131nmaz elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyete tabi ise, payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmeden vasiyetin infaz\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Bu durumda h\u00e2kim, davac\u0131ya elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete \u00e7evrilmesi i\u00e7in s\u00fcre ve yetki vermeli, ard\u0131ndan olu\u015facak duruma g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aksi takdirde verilen karar uygulanamaz h\u00e2le gelir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7 :<\/p>\n
Miras\u0131n elbirli\u011fi h\u00e2linde s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, ge\u00e7mi\u015fin ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 temsil etse de gelece\u011fe ait bireysel tasarruflar\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcnde \u00e7o\u011fu zaman g\u00f6r\u00fcnmeyen bir engel gibi durmaktad\u0131r. Ekonomik i\u015flevsellikten hukuki i\u015flem kolayl\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yat\u0131r\u0131m kabiliyetinden m\u00fclkiyetin etkin kullan\u0131m\u0131na kadar bir\u00e7ok alanda elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 hem miras\u00e7\u0131lar hem de hukuk uygulay\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken teknik bir d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm h\u00e2line gelmi\u015ftir. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi ve Kadastro Kanunu\u2019nun Ek 3. maddesi bu d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fc \u00e7\u00f6zebilmek i\u00e7in iki ayr\u0131 fakat birbiriyle b\u00fct\u00fcnle\u015fen yol sunar: biri yarg\u0131sal m\u00fcdahale ile hakk\u0131n tesisi, di\u011feri idari kolayl\u0131kla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn prati\u011fe d\u00f6k\u00fclmesi.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Miras ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fan elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyet, paylar\u0131n belirli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, maliklerin ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerinde hep birlikte hak sahibi olduklar\u0131 bir m\u00fclkiyet t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu yap\u0131, miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel tasarruflar\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, sat\u0131\u015f, in\u015faat, ipotek ve hukuki i\u015flemlerde de \u00f6nemli engellere yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. Bu sebeple, elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, hem ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n ekonomiye kazand\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 hem de miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n bireysel haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kritik bir i\u015flemdir. Uygulamada ise bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcn hangi usullerle yap\u0131labilece\u011fi, hangi hallerde dava a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu oldu\u011fu ve hangi durumlar\u0131n idari yolla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclebilece\u011fi hususunda ciddi teredd\u00fctler ya\u015fanmaktad\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu makalede; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 644. maddesi ile 3402 say\u0131l\u0131 Kadastro Kanunu\u2019nun Ek 3. maddesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyete d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin yollar\u0131, dava \u015fartlar\u0131, zorunlu arabuluculuk tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131, aktif husumet ve taraf te\u015fkili gibi teknik meseleler Yarg\u0131tay ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131 \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda detayl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde ele al\u0131nacakt\u0131r. A) KADASTRO KANUNU EK MADDE 3 UYARINCA ELB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130 M\u00dcLK\u0130YET\u0130N TEK TARAFLI TALEP VE TEBL\u0130GATLA PAYLI M\u00dcLK\u0130YETE D\u00d6N\u00dc\u015eT\u00dcR\u00dcLMES\u0130 Miras yoluyla kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla veya tek bir miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine tapuda tescil edilebilir. Tek miras\u00e7\u0131n\u0131n talebinde elbirli\u011fi (i\u015ftirak) m\u00fclkiyeti esas al\u0131n\u0131rken, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar birlikte ba\u015fvurursa veya payl\u0131 (m\u00fc\u015fterek) m\u00fclkiyeti a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a kabul ederlerse, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz payl\u0131 olarak tescil edilir. Ayr\u0131ca, yeni d\u00fczenlemelerle birlikte bir miras\u00e7\u0131, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lara tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131yla elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetin …<\/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-133306","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n