Bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaza sahip olmak, ona ula\u015fam\u0131yorsak yeterli de\u011fildir. E\u011fer bir arsa ya da tarla anayola \u00e7\u0131kam\u0131yorsa ya da mevcut yol ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lam\u0131yorsa, o m\u00fclkiyetin de\u011feri d\u00fc\u015fer, kullan\u0131m\u0131 zorla\u015f\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu gibi durumlarda ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 devreye girer. Kom\u015fu parsellerden ge\u00e7erek anayola ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in mahkemeden veya r\u0131zayla ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talep edilebilir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 bazen taraflar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle kurulmak istendi\u011finde, bu hakk\u0131n ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in tapuya tescil edilmesi gerekir. Di\u011fer yandan, uygulamada en \u00e7ok kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131lan durum, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n dava yoluyla talep edilmesidir. Bu yaz\u0131da, \u00f6zellikle zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n hangi \u015fartlarda kurulabilece\u011fini, kimlerin bu hakk\u0131 isteyebilece\u011fini, bedelin nas\u0131l belirlenece\u011fini ve ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n ne zaman sona erece\u011fini Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131yla birlikte sade bir \u015fekilde anlataca\u011f\u0131z.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ TANIMI VE UYGULAMA KAPSAMI<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Belirlenirken Taraf Yararlar\u0131, Kom\u015fuluk Hukuku ve Fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Dengesi G\u00f6zetilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2006\/11050, K. 2007\/13333, T. 14.02.2006<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetini s\u0131n\u0131rlayan ve kom\u015fuluk hukukuna dayanan bir irtifak t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu nedenle g\u00fczerg\u00e2h belirlenirken davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fisel tercihlerinden ziyade ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fi, ge\u00e7i\u015fin hangi ara\u00e7larla yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi objektif \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmal\u0131; taraf menfaatleri dengelenerek fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkesi g\u00f6zetilmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikine a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 k\u00fclfet y\u00fcklenmemesi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7it bedeli mahkeme karar\u0131 verilmeden \u00f6nce vezneye yat\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, En Az Zarar Verecek ve Y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc En B\u00fcy\u00fck Ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan Ge\u00e7irilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2011\/2495, K. 2011\/3799, T. 24.03.2011 \u2013 E. 16614, K. 591, T. 20.01.2016 \u2013 E. 29, K. 3093, T. 10.03.2016<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilirken kom\u015fuluk hukuku ve fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkeleri gere\u011fi, ge\u00e7idin m\u00fcmk\u00fcnse en uygun kom\u015fudan, bu m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse en az zarar g\u00f6recek ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7irilmesi gerekir. Yarg\u0131tay, ayr\u0131ca y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc b\u00fcy\u00fck ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara \u00f6ncelik verilmesini ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kullan\u0131m b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bozulmamas\u0131n\u0131 vurgulamaktad\u0131r. G\u00fczerg\u00e2h se\u00e7iminde alternatif parsellerin de de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve tercihin gerek\u00e7eli olarak a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n M\u00fclkiyetine Ba\u011fl\u0131 Yenilik Do\u011furan Bir Hakt\u0131r ve \u015eartlar\u0131 Varsa Talep Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, E. 2014\/14-1524, K. 1041, T. 18.03.2015<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n genel yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikine tan\u0131nan, yenilik do\u011furan ve do\u011frudan m\u00fclkiyete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir hak oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Bu hak, kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ko\u015fullar ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finde, kom\u015fu ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7it talep etme yetkisi verir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Tesisi \u0130\u00e7in T\u00fcm Alternatif G\u00fczerg\u00e2hlar De\u011ferlendirilmeli, En Uygun Olan Se\u00e7ilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 29, K. 3093, T. 10.03.2016<\/p>\n
Mahkeme, \u00e7evredeki genel yollar\u0131 g\u00f6steren geni\u015f \u00f6l\u00e7ekli pafta getirterek, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola kesintisiz ula\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayacak t\u00fcm ge\u00e7it alternatiflerini belirlemeli ve bu se\u00e7enekler aras\u0131nda en uygun olan\u0131 \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis etmelidir. Bu yap\u0131lmadan karar verilmesi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Kesintisiz Olmal\u0131, G\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00dczerindeki T\u00fcm Parseller Davaya Dahil Edilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 6524, K. 8100, T. 28.05.2013 \u2013 E. 2014\/10174, K. 2015\/1344, T. 09.02.2015 \u2013 E. 2001\/4292, K. 2001\/4674, T. 14.06.2001<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilirken, ihtiya\u00e7 i\u00e7indeki ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola kesintisiz \u015fekilde ula\u015fmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu \u201ckesintisizlik ilkesi\u201d uyar\u0131nca, ge\u00e7idin birden fazla ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7mesi gerekiyorsa, bu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n tamam\u0131 davaya dahil edilmeli ve g\u00fczerg\u00e2h boyunca b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fck sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aksi h\u00e2lde ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n fiilen kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmaz ve verilen karar ge\u00e7ersiz h\u00e2le gelir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Karayoluna Ba\u011flan\u0131yorsa, G\u00fcvenlik ve Mevzuata Uygunluk Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131, Sorun Varsa Alternatif Yollar De\u011ferlendirilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2013\/12778, K. 2014\/237, T. 07.01.2014<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it karayoluna \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yorsa, bu ba\u011flant\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenli ve mevzuata uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Karayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden sorulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Tehlike varsa, davac\u0131n\u0131n makul masraflarla bu sorunu giderip gideremeyece\u011fi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Sorun giderilemiyorsa, ba\u015fka ge\u00e7it alternatifleri de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. Hi\u00e7bir se\u00e7enek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse dava reddedilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Talebinde, \u00dczerinden Daha \u00d6nce Ge\u00e7it Kurulmu\u015f Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Varsa Bu G\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00d6ncelikle De\u011ferlendirilmeli ve Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k Bu Yolla \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 4780, K. 10271, T. 22.09.2014<\/p>\n
Zorunlu ge\u00e7it istemi de\u011ferlendirilirken, genel yola ula\u015fan se\u00e7enekler aras\u0131nda daha \u00f6nce ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilmi\u015f bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mevcutsa, bu g\u00fczerg\u00e2h di\u011fer ko\u015fullarla \u00e7eli\u015fmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece \u00f6ncelikle dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131 ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k m\u00fcmk\u00fcnse bu yolla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it G\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 Belirlenirken Yolun Devam\u0131nda da 2,5\u20133 Metre Geni\u015flik Sa\u011flanmal\u0131<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 16278, K. 1788, T. 12.02.2016 \u2013 E. 6038, K. 7803, T. 21.05.2013<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesisinde sadece ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 de\u011fil, ge\u00e7idin devam eden k\u0131sm\u0131nda da yeterli geni\u015fli\u011fin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme, g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 belirlerken en az 2,5\u20133 metre geni\u015flik sa\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zetmeli ve bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcye uygun bir karar vermelidir.<\/p>\n
\u0130frazla Olu\u015fan Parsellerin Yol \u0130htiyac\u0131 Ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131na Y\u00fcklenemez; Payda\u015flar Taksim S\u0131ras\u0131nda Ge\u00e7i\u015fi Sa\u011flamak Zorundad\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2001\/2233, K. 2001\/2804, T. 19.04.2001<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz payda\u015flar aras\u0131nda taksim edilerek ifraz ediliyorsa, her bir yeni parselin yola ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 planlanmal\u0131 ve ge\u00e7i\u015f hakk\u0131 o anda d\u00fczenlenmelidir. Bu sorumluluk payda\u015flara aittir. E\u011fer bu yap\u0131lmadan yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan parseller olu\u015fturulmu\u015fsa, sonradan kom\u015fu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7it talep edilemez.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda De\u011ferlendirme Ki\u015filere De\u011fil Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara G\u00f6re Yap\u0131l\u0131r; E\u015fin Parselinden Faydalan\u0131l\u0131yor Olmas\u0131 Davan\u0131n Reddine Gerek\u00e7e Olamaz<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 3285, K. 5219, T. 04.04.2013<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131n\u0131n taraflar\u0131n ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkilerine g\u00f6re de\u011fil, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n konumuna g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fine ait olan kom\u015fu parseli kullan\u0131yor olmas\u0131 veya bu parselin ana yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinin reddi i\u00e7in yeterli neden olu\u015fturmaz. Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkiler de\u011fil ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n hukuki ve fiil\u00ee durumu esas al\u0131narak tesis edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
K\u00fclt\u00fcr ve Tabiat Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Niteli\u011findeki Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardan Ge\u00e7it Talep Edilmeden \u00d6nce Koruma Kurulu\u2019ndan G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 67, K. 4005, T. 25.03.2014<\/p>\n
E\u011fer ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talep edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz tapuda k\u00fclt\u00fcr ve tabiat varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 olarak belirtilmi\u015fse, bu niteli\u011fin ge\u00e7it kurulmas\u0131na engel te\u015fkil edip etmedi\u011fi \u00f6ncelikle K\u00fclt\u00fcr ve Tabiat Varl\u0131klar\u0131 Koruma Kurulu’na sorulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Su Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Ancak Ba\u015fka Yerden Su Getirmek \u0130mk\u00e2ns\u0131z ya da A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 Masrafl\u0131ysa ve Ta\u015f\u0131nmaza Zarar Vermeyecek \u015eekilde Kurulabilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 1999\/946, K. 1999\/1602, T. 04.03.1999 \u2013 E. 2002\/3152, K. 2002\/3661, T. 10.05.2002<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, su ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilebilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fka bir g\u00fczerg\u00e2htan su getirme imk\u00e2n\u0131 olmamal\u0131 ya da bu yol ekonomik a\u00e7\u0131dan \u00e7ok b\u00fcy\u00fck bir y\u00fck getirmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca bu ge\u00e7it, daval\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 b\u00f6lmeyecek \u015fekilde planlanmal\u0131 ve kullan\u0131lacak mecra (boru) geni\u015fli\u011fi ihtiyaca orant\u0131l\u0131 olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Alternatifler ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmadan ve orant\u0131s\u0131z geni\u015flikte mecra irtifak\u0131 kurulmas\u0131 hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Mutlak ve Nispi Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Ayr\u0131m\u0131: Yolun Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Yeterli De\u011fildir, \u0130htiyac\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131lay\u0131p Kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 15779, K. 3896, T. 31.03.2016 | E. 9984, K. 10854, T. 25.09.2008 | E. 3016, K. 7139, T. 29.05.2014 | E. 2793, K. 4008, T. 25.03.2014<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde yaln\u0131zca yolun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011fil, bu yolun kullan\u0131m amac\u0131na uygunlu\u011fu da dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Tamamen yolsuz kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in mutlak ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131, mevcut yolu ihtiyac\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelmeyen ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in ise nispi ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 s\u00f6z konusudur.\u2028Kot fark\u0131, patika geni\u015fli\u011fi, yolun fiilen kullan\u0131lamaz olu\u015fu gibi unsurlar nedeniyle ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanamamas\u0131 durumunda, bu hususlar ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi incelemesi ile belirlenmeli; gerekiyorsa mevcut yol geni\u015fletilerek ya da onar\u0131larak ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Yolunun Her \u0130ki Yan\u0131na Duvar veya Tel \u00c7ekilerek Y\u00fckl\u00fc Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Malikinin Kendi Arazisine Eri\u015fimi Engellenemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2000\/2777, K. 2000\/3063, T. 02.05.2000 \u2013 E. 1988\/986, K. 1989\/3992, T. 17.04.1989<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kullan\u0131l\u0131rken, yararlanan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki ge\u00e7it yolunun her iki taraf\u0131n\u0131 kapatarak y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin kendi arazisine ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 engelleyemez. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, b\u00f6yle bir m\u00fcdahale, y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal eder ve hukuken korunamaz.<\/p>\n
L\u00fczumlu Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, Hizmet Veren Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00dczerindeki T\u00fcm Ayni Haklara \u00dcst\u00fcn Gelir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay \u0130BK, E. 1966\/22, K. 1968\/8, T. 29.04.1968 (RG: 01.06.1968, Say\u0131: 12913)<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Kurulu’na g\u00f6re, l\u00fczumlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 di\u011fer irtifak haklar\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 olarak, sadece m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fil, hizmet eden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerindeki t\u00fcm ayni haklar\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlar. Bu hak, rehin ve di\u011fer ayni irtifaklardan \u00f6nce gelir ve onlara \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck sa\u011flar.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talebi, Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n Tapuya Tescili ile Hukuken \u0130leri S\u00fcr\u00fclebilir Hale Gelir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. HD., E. 1990\/5966, K. 1990\/6122, T. 04.05.1990<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ayni haklar ancak tapuya tescil ile do\u011far. Bu nedenle, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n kazan\u0131lmas\u0131 tescile ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunulabilmesi i\u00e7in ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapuda tescilli olmas\u0131 gerekir. Tescil tamamlanmadan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez.<\/p>\n
Tapu tahsis belgesi m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 vermez; sadece ki\u015fisel hak sa\u011flar, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebine dayanak olamaz.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 13678, K. 73, T. 17.01.2011<\/p>\n
Tapu tahsis belgesi, m\u00fclkiyetin devrini sa\u011flamaz; yaln\u0131zca fiili kullan\u0131m hakk\u0131 tan\u0131r. Bu belgeye sahip ki\u015fi, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu uyar\u0131nca ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunamaz. Bu nedenle m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131na dayanmayan davac\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istemi reddedilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7i\u015fi Engelleyen Ka\u00e7ak Yap\u0131 Varsa Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 De\u011fil, Kal Davas\u0131 A\u00e7\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 12819, K. 461, T. 09.01.2014<\/p>\n
Bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kadastro yoluna cephesi bulunmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen bu yolun ka\u00e7ak yap\u0131la\u015fma nedeniyle kullan\u0131lamaz h\u00e2le gelmesi, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilmesini hakl\u0131 k\u0131lmaz.\u2028Bu durumda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken, yol \u00fczerindeki tecav\u00fcz\u00fcn \u00f6nlenmesi i\u00e7in ‘elatman\u0131n \u00f6nlenmesi’ veya ‘kal’ davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. Yolun daralt\u0131lmas\u0131 ya da i\u015fgal edilmesi gibi durumlar, \u00f6ncelikle mevcut yolun fiilen kullan\u0131labilir h\u00e2le getirilmesi yoluyla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmelidir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI BEDEL\u0130N\u0130N BEL\u0130RLENMES\u0130 \u2013 YARGITAY KR\u0130TERLER\u0130 \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Bedeli Tam De\u011fil, \u0130rtifak Bedelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/11002 E., 2006\/14234 K., 01.12.2006<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6denecek bedel, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 olan tam bedel de\u011fil, yaln\u0131zca irtifak hakk\u0131 nedeniyle do\u011fan s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 kullan\u0131ma dair bedeldir.\u2028<\/p>\n
2. Bedel Ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i, G\u00fcncel ve Karar Tarihine Yak\u0131n Olmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/2116 E., 2006\/3531 K., 27.03.2006\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/2899 E., 2006\/6087 K., 18.04.2013<\/p>\n
Bedel, karar tarihine en yak\u0131n tarihli ve rayice uygun \u015fekilde belirlenmelidir. Mahkeme s\u00fcreci uzam\u0131\u015fsa yeniden de\u011ferleme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028<\/p>\n
3. Bedel \u00d6nceden Belirlenmeli ve Karardan \u00d6nce Depo Edilmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2002\/8522 E., 2002\/8306 K., 09.12.2002<\/p>\n
Bedel, bilirki\u015fi raporuyla objektif kriterlere g\u00f6re hesaplanmal\u0131 ve mahkeme karar\u0131ndan \u00f6nce ge\u00e7ici olarak mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. De\u011fer Kayb\u0131 ve Kullan\u0131m Azalmas\u0131 Bedeline Eklenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2013\/2631 E., 2013\/4363 K., 21.03.2013<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmazda olu\u015fan de\u011fer kayb\u0131, \u00f6zellikle ge\u00e7it sebebiyle kullan\u0131lamaz h\u00e2le gelen k\u0131s\u0131mlar varsa, ayr\u0131ca bedelle yans\u0131t\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
5. A\u011fa\u00e7 ve Muhdesat Bedeli de Dikkate Al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2015\/15639 E., 2016\/1556 K., 08.02.2016\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2019\/2862 E., 2019\/7432 K., 07.11.2019\u2028Ge\u00e7it alan\u0131nda a\u011fa\u00e7, yap\u0131 veya tesis varsa, bunlar\u0131n de\u011feri de bedelde dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028<\/p>\n
6. \u00d6nceki Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131na Ba\u011flant\u0131 Kurulmu\u015fsa, \u00d6nceki Bedel D\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2010\/14613 E., 2010\/625 K., 01.06.2010<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it, daha \u00f6nce kurulmu\u015f bir ge\u00e7it g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131ysa, \u00f6nceki bedel d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yeni bedel hesaplanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Ge\u00e7it T\u00fcr\u00fc ve Gereklili\u011fi Belirlenmeden Bedel Belirlenemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay HGK., 1994\/848 E., 1995\/75 K., 15.02.1995\u2028Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 mutlak m\u0131, nispi mi? Yol yoklu\u011fu mu, yetersizli\u011fi mi var? Bu belirlenmeden do\u011frudan bedel belirlenemez.<\/p>\n
8.\u0130rtifak hakk\u0131 nedeniyle olu\u015fan de\u011fer kayb\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirli oranlar\u0131 ge\u00e7emez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 18. HD, E. 2005\/7450, K. 2005\/5634, T. 20.09.2005<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmazda kurulan irtifak hakk\u0131 sebebiyle meydana gelecek de\u011fer kayb\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. Arazilerde bu oran en fazla %35, arsalarda ise en fazla %50 olarak uygulanabilir. Bu oranlar, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n cins ve niteli\u011fine uygun kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 etkilemeyen durumlar i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli olup, bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131r \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fc olarak dikkate al\u0131nmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9.Ge\u00e7it bedeli, dava tarihi de\u011fil, h\u00fckme en yak\u0131n tarihe g\u00f6re belirlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 2005\/7499, K. 2005\/9154, T. 18.10.2005<\/p>\n
Dava ile karar tarihi aras\u0131nda uzun bir s\u00fcre ge\u00e7mi\u015fse, de\u011fi\u015fen ekonomik ko\u015fullar, enflasyon ve paran\u0131n al\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it bedelinin objektif kriterlerle g\u00fcncel rayi\u00e7lere g\u00f6re yeniden belirlenmesi gerekir. Dava tarihine g\u00f6re belirlenen bedel, hakkaniyete ve g\u00fcncel de\u011fere uygun d\u00fc\u015fmez. Bu sebeple mahkemece h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n de\u011ferin esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n
10.Ge\u00e7it bedeli, dava tarihi de\u011fil, h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n rayi\u00e7 de\u011fer esas al\u0131narak belirlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, 18.10.2005, E. 2005\/7499, K. 2005\/9154<\/p>\n
Dava ile karar tarihi aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en uzun s\u00fcre, de\u011fi\u015fen ekonomik yap\u0131, enflasyon ve paran\u0131n al\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it bedelinin objektif kriterlere g\u00f6re yeniden belirlenmesini gerektirir. Dava tarihine g\u00f6re tespit edilen bedel, hakkaniyete ve g\u00fcncel piyasa de\u011ferine uygun d\u00fc\u015fmez. Bu sebeple, mahkemece h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n tarihli rayi\u00e7 de\u011fer esas al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 bedeli, karar verilmeden \u00f6nce mahkeme veznesine depo edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, 02.04.2008, E. 2008\/3282, K. 2008\/4474<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesisinde, y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin bedelin tahsili i\u00e7in ayr\u0131ca dava a\u00e7mak zorunda kalmamas\u0131 ve ek k\u00fclfetlerle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in, saptanan ge\u00e7it bedelinin h\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce mahkeme veznesine depo edilmesi zorunludur. Bu, hem hukuki g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hem de fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkesini sa\u011flar.<\/p>\n
KAMU TA\u015eINMAZLARINDA GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI<\/p>\n
Kamu Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131ndan Kal\u0131c\u0131 Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Kurulamaz; Zorunlu H\u00e2lde Sadece Ge\u00e7ici Kullan\u0131m \u0130zni Al\u0131nabilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 13. HD., E. 2011\/7678, K. 2011\/8746, T. 04.07.2011<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamakt\u0131r; ancak orman ve benzeri kamu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 \u00fczerinde \u00f6zel m\u00fclkiyet kurulamayaca\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in bu yerlerde kal\u0131c\u0131 ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilemez. Fiil\u00ee imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131k varsa, yaln\u0131zca ilgili kurumdan ge\u00e7ici kullan\u0131m izni al\u0131nabilir ve bu da tapuya i\u015flenemez.<\/p>\n
Tapusuz Devlet Arazilerinden Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 \u0130stenemez, \u00d6nce Tescil Gerekir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 11904, K. 13035, T. 19.11.2009\u2028Orman s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan veya tapusuz olan devlet arazilerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istenebilmesi i\u00e7in, \u00f6ncelikle bu yerlerin ilgili kurum ad\u0131na tapuya tescili gerekir. Tescil yap\u0131lmadan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulamaz. Tescil m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse, davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fka tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardan ge\u00e7it sa\u011flan\u0131p sa\u011flanamayaca\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Meralardan Ge\u00e7it Verilemez, Ba\u015fka G\u00fczerg\u00e2hlar Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 5270, K. 6486, T. 06.06.2006\u2028Kamuya ait meralardan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilemez. Bu durumda mahkeme, ba\u015fka uygun yollar olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131, ke\u015fif yapmal\u0131 ve etrafl\u0131 bir bilirki\u015fi raporu alarak karar vermelidir.<\/p>\n
Dere yata\u011f\u0131ndan ge\u00e7i\u015f gerekiyorsa, davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u00f6pr\u00fc masraf\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmesi \u015fart\u0131yla ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nabilir.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 595, K. 777, T. 22.01.2015<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it talebi de\u011ferlendirilirken, \u00e7evredeki yollar\u0131 g\u00f6steren geni\u015f paftalar getirtilerek genel yola ula\u015f\u0131m sa\u011flayabilecek t\u00fcm alternatifler ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer bu ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar sonucunda davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131ndan sadece dere yata\u011f\u0131 \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7i\u015fle ba\u011flant\u0131 sa\u011flanabiliyorsa ve davac\u0131 k\u00f6pr\u00fc yapma masraf\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmeyi kabul etmi\u015fse, talep etti\u011fi g\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Tapuda Kay\u0131tl\u0131 Olmayan veya Kadastro G\u00f6rmemi\u015f Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar \u00dczerinden Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talep Edilemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2017\/5274, K. 2018\/254, T. 15.01.2018<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunulabilmesi i\u00e7in hem yararlanan hem de y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapuda tescilli olmas\u0131 gerekir. Kadastro g\u00f6rmemi\u015f ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n zilyedinden ge\u00e7it talep edilemez. Devletin h\u00fck\u00fcm ve tasarrufunda kalan, tescil d\u0131\u015f\u0131 b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulabilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle ilgili idare ad\u0131na tescil i\u015fleminin tamamlanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 \u015fartt\u0131r. Uzun s\u00fcreli zilyetlik h\u00e2linde ise TMK m. 713 uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131lacak tapu iptal ve tescil davas\u0131 sonucu olu\u015fan m\u00fclkiyet kazan\u0131m\u0131 sonras\u0131nda ge\u00e7it talebi g\u00fcndeme gelebilir.<\/p>\n
\u0130mar Plan\u0131nda Yol \u00d6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f Olsa da Fiilen A\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131k\u00e7a Ge\u00e7it \u0130htiyac\u0131 Devam Eder<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay HGK, E. 1980\/14-2083, K. 1983\/601, T. 01.06.1983<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 1999\/431, K. 1999\/2220, T. 23.03.1999<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n imar plan\u0131nda yola cepheli g\u00f6z\u00fckmesi, o yoldan hen\u00fcz fiilen ve hukuken yararlan\u0131lam\u0131yorsa, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. Sadece planda yer al\u0131yor olmas\u0131, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n reddi i\u00e7in yeterli say\u0131lmaz; yolun fiilen a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve kullan\u0131l\u0131r h\u00e2le gelmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
\u0130mar Uygulamas\u0131yla Yolu Kapanan Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u0130\u00e7in Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talep Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2003\/6317, K. 2003\/8221, T. 18.11.2003 \u2013 E. 2012\/10286, K. 2012\/12270, T. 30.10.2012<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ba\u015fta yola cephesi olan ancak imar uygulamas\u0131yla yolu kapanan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istenebilir. Planlara g\u00f6re yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan parseller olu\u015fturulamaz; b\u00f6yle bir durum varsa ta\u015f\u0131nmaz ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 i\u00e7indedir. Bu durumda en uygun kom\u015fudan ya da en az zarar g\u00f6recek olandan ge\u00e7it istenebilir.<\/p>\n
Zaruri H\u00e2llerde Yol Olarak Kullan\u0131lan Kuru Dere Yata\u011f\u0131na Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Tesis Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2001\/727, K. 2001\/1152, T. 16.02.2001, Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2016\/13709, K. 2019\/4979, T. 30.05.2019<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinin zaruri h\u00e2llerde de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini, bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layabilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k olan kuru dere yata\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, fiilen yol olarak kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kullan\u0131m\u0131nda sak\u0131nca bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde ge\u00e7it g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 olarak kabul edilebilece\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ YER\u0130N\u0130N DE\u011e\u0130\u015eT\u0130R\u0130LMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u0130rtifak Yerinin De\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi, Y\u00fckl\u00fc Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Malikinin Talebiyle ve Belirli \u015eartlarla M\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2007\/6715, K. 2007\/8327, T. 26.06.2007\u2028Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in kurulur ve y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki bu ge\u00e7i\u015fe katlanmak zorundad\u0131r. Ancak zamanla ko\u015fullar de\u011fi\u015firse, TMK m.791 uyar\u0131nca y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki ge\u00e7it yerinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesini isteyebilir. Bunun i\u00e7in:<\/p>\n
1. Mevcut ge\u00e7it ciddi zorluk \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131yor olmal\u0131,<\/p>\n
2. Yeni ge\u00e7it yolu, yararlanan ki\u015fiye \u00f6nemli zarar vermemeli,<\/p>\n
3. Yeni g\u00fczerg\u00e2h ayn\u0131 i\u015flevi g\u00f6rebilecek durumda olmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028Bu \u00fc\u00e7 \u015fart birlikte varsa, ge\u00e7it yeri de\u011fi\u015ftirilebilir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ TERK\u0130N\u0130<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz b\u00f6l\u00fcnse de t\u00fcm parseller \u00fczerinde devam eder.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, E. 2008\/18-317, K. 2008\/332, T. 16.04.2008<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it irtifak\u0131 kurulan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz daha sonra parseller h\u00e2linde b\u00f6l\u00fcnse bile, irtifak hakk\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcnmezli\u011fi ilkesi gere\u011fi her parsel \u00fczerinde ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini korur. Ancak sadece belirli parseller \u00fczerinde kullan\u0131l\u0131yorsa, kullan\u0131lmayan di\u011fer parsellerin malikleri irtifak\u0131n terkinini talep edebilir. Tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, bu talebi irtifak hakk\u0131 sahibine bildirir; itiraz edilirse mahkemeden terkin karar\u0131 al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, kesin ve s\u00fcrekli faydas\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015fse terkin edilebilir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 2002\/899, K. 2002\/1401, T. 01.03.2002<\/p>\n
E\u011fer ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 zamanla amac\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015f, hak sahibine art\u0131k bir yarar sa\u011flam\u0131yorsa, terkini talep edilebilir. Sadece fiilen kullan\u0131lan bir yolun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131, o yerin \u201cgenel yol\u201d olarak kabul\u00fcn\u00fc sa\u011flamaz. Bu nedenle, hukuki niteli\u011fi olmayan bir kullan\u0131m ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131 sona erdirmez.<\/p>\n
Yeni parselin yola cepheli olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 ortadan kalkar.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 1999\/4339, K. 1999\/5364, T. 16.09.1999<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131, daha sonra yola cepheli bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131n alm\u0131\u015f ve ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131na ihtiya\u00e7 kalmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenle, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 k\u00fclfetinin devam etmesi hakkaniyete ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n yeni durumu dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n sona erdi\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 sona erse bile \u00f6denmi\u015f bedelin tamam\u0131 iade edilmez.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 1999\/2902, K. 1999\/3465, T. 10.05.1999<\/p>\n
Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n sona ermesi durumunda, \u00f6nceki d\u00f6nemde sa\u011flanan kullan\u0131m avantaj\u0131 nedeniyle, \u00f6denen bedelin tamam\u0131n\u0131n iadesine karar verilmesi gerekmez. Bu konuda hakkaniyet ilkesi g\u00f6zetilmelidir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI DAVA S\u00dcREC\u0130 HAKKINDA<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda G\u00f6revli Mahkeme Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 103, K. 2308, T. 03.03.2015<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin davalar, TMK m.747 uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131r ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmesinden sonra a\u00e7\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr davalarda g\u00f6revli mahkeme asliye hukuk mahkemesidir. Bu nedenle, sulh hukuk mahkemesince esas hakk\u0131nda karar verilmesi usule ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r; g\u00f6revsizlik karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulsa da yarg\u0131lama giderleri ve vek\u00e2let \u00fccreti davac\u0131 \u00fczerinde kal\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 29, K. 3095, T. 10.03.2016 \u2013 E. 2017\/3037, K. 2021\/752, T. 09.02.2021<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131, taraflar aras\u0131nda haks\u0131zl\u0131k esas\u0131na de\u011fil, ihtiya\u00e7 ve fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesine dayan\u0131r. Bu nedenle, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilse dahi, yarg\u0131lama giderleri ile vek\u00e2let \u00fccreti davac\u0131 \u00fczerinde b\u0131rak\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Zorunlu Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda Taraflara \u0130li\u015fkin Kriterler (Elbirli\u011fi \/ Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyet)<\/p>\n
1. Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinde t\u00fcm maliklerin birlikte hareket etmesi gerekir.\u2028TMK m. 640\/2 gere\u011fince, miras\u00e7\u0131lar terekeye elbirli\u011fiyle sahip olurlar. Bu nedenle elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine konu bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz lehine ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmas\u0131 isteniyorsa, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n birlikte dava a\u00e7mas\u0131 gerekir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 11681, K. 1342, T. 15.02.2016\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 15779, K. 3896, T. 31.03.2016<\/p>\n
2. Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti h\u00e2linde, yaln\u0131z bir payda\u015f dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015fsa mahkeme hemen ret karar\u0131 veremez.\u2028Di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131n davaya kat\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre verilmeli; bu m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmazsa miras \u015firketine temsilci atanmas\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmelidir.\u2028Samsun BAM, 1. HD., E. 2022\/2321, K. 2022\/2318, T. 04.10.2022<\/p>\n
3. Payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyette her payda\u015f dava a\u00e7abilir.\u2028Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ekonomik i\u015flevini art\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve b\u00f6l\u00fcnemeyen ortak menfaate hizmet etti\u011fi i\u00e7in her payda\u015f, di\u011ferlerini temsilen bu hakk\u0131 talep edebilir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay HGK, E. 2002\/3187, K. 3559, T. 07.05.2002\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2002\/6922, K. 2002\/8706, T. 19.12.2002\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2005\/5198, K. 2005\/7254, T. 24.07.2005<\/p>\n
4. S\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee hak sahiplerinin davaya kat\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek yoktur.\u2028Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, hizmet veren ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki t\u00fcm s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee haklar\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcnde gelir. Bu nedenle, irtifak s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine veya mahkeme karar\u0131na s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee hak sahiplerinin r\u0131za g\u00f6stermesi aranmaz; onlara kar\u015f\u0131 husumet y\u00f6neltilmesine gerek yoktur.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay \u0130BK, E. 1966\/22, K. 1968\/8, T. 29.04.1968 (RG: 01.06.1968, Say\u0131: 12913)<\/p>\n
Talep Edilenden Ba\u015fka Parselden Ge\u00e7it Verilecekse, Yeni Malikler Davaya Dahil Edilmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 4001, K. 6100, T. 19.04.2013<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131nda mahkeme, davac\u0131n\u0131n talep etti\u011fi yer d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda daha uygun bir g\u00fczerg\u00e2h belirleyebilir. Bu yeni g\u00fczerg\u00e2hta yer alan parsel maliklerine ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta dava a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da, bu durum kabul edilebilir bir yan\u0131lg\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu nedenle HMK m.124 uyar\u0131nca, yeni ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliklerinin har\u00e7s\u0131z \u015fekilde davaya d\u00e2hil edilmesine izin verilmelidir.<\/p>\n
\u200bBir ta\u015f\u0131nmaza sahip olmak, ona ula\u015fam\u0131yorsak yeterli de\u011fildir. E\u011fer bir arsa ya da tarla anayola \u00e7\u0131kam\u0131yorsa ya da mevcut yol ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lam\u0131yorsa, o m\u00fclkiyetin de\u011feri d\u00fc\u015fer, kullan\u0131m\u0131 zorla\u015f\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu gibi durumlarda ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 devreye girer. Kom\u015fu parsellerden ge\u00e7erek anayola ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in mahkemeden veya r\u0131zayla ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talep edilebilir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 bazen taraflar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle kurulmak istendi\u011finde, bu hakk\u0131n ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in tapuya tescil edilmesi gerekir. Di\u011fer yandan, uygulamada en \u00e7ok kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131lan durum, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n dava yoluyla talep edilmesidir. Bu yaz\u0131da, \u00f6zellikle zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n hangi \u015fartlarda kurulabilece\u011fini, kimlerin bu hakk\u0131 isteyebilece\u011fini, bedelin nas\u0131l belirlenece\u011fini ve ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n ne zaman sona erece\u011fini Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131yla birlikte sade bir \u015fekilde anlataca\u011f\u0131z.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ TANIMI VE UYGULAMA KAPSAMI<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Belirlenirken Taraf Yararlar\u0131, Kom\u015fuluk Hukuku ve Fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Dengesi G\u00f6zetilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2006\/11050, K. 2007\/13333, T. 14.02.2006<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetini s\u0131n\u0131rlayan ve kom\u015fuluk hukukuna dayanan bir irtifak t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu nedenle g\u00fczerg\u00e2h belirlenirken davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fisel tercihlerinden ziyade ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fi, ge\u00e7i\u015fin hangi ara\u00e7larla yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi objektif \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmal\u0131; taraf menfaatleri dengelenerek fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkesi g\u00f6zetilmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikine a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 k\u00fclfet y\u00fcklenmemesi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7it bedeli mahkeme karar\u0131 verilmeden \u00f6nce vezneye yat\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, En Az Zarar Verecek ve Y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc En B\u00fcy\u00fck Ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan Ge\u00e7irilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2011\/2495, K. 2011\/3799, T. 24.03.2011 \u2013 E. 16614, K. 591, T. 20.01.2016 \u2013 E. 29, K. 3093, T. 10.03.2016<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilirken kom\u015fuluk hukuku ve fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkeleri gere\u011fi, ge\u00e7idin m\u00fcmk\u00fcnse en uygun kom\u015fudan, bu m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse en az zarar g\u00f6recek ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7irilmesi gerekir. Yarg\u0131tay, ayr\u0131ca y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc b\u00fcy\u00fck ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara \u00f6ncelik verilmesini ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kullan\u0131m b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bozulmamas\u0131n\u0131 vurgulamaktad\u0131r. G\u00fczerg\u00e2h se\u00e7iminde alternatif parsellerin de de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve tercihin gerek\u00e7eli olarak a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n M\u00fclkiyetine Ba\u011fl\u0131 Yenilik Do\u011furan Bir Hakt\u0131r ve \u015eartlar\u0131 Varsa Talep Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, E. 2014\/14-1524, K. 1041, T. 18.03.2015<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n genel yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikine tan\u0131nan, yenilik do\u011furan ve do\u011frudan m\u00fclkiyete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir hak oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Bu hak, kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ko\u015fullar ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finde, kom\u015fu ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7it talep etme yetkisi verir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Tesisi \u0130\u00e7in T\u00fcm Alternatif G\u00fczerg\u00e2hlar De\u011ferlendirilmeli, En Uygun Olan Se\u00e7ilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 29, K. 3093, T. 10.03.2016<\/p>\n
Mahkeme, \u00e7evredeki genel yollar\u0131 g\u00f6steren geni\u015f \u00f6l\u00e7ekli pafta getirterek, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola kesintisiz ula\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayacak t\u00fcm ge\u00e7it alternatiflerini belirlemeli ve bu se\u00e7enekler aras\u0131nda en uygun olan\u0131 \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis etmelidir. Bu yap\u0131lmadan karar verilmesi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Kesintisiz Olmal\u0131, G\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00dczerindeki T\u00fcm Parseller Davaya Dahil Edilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 6524, K. 8100, T. 28.05.2013 \u2013 E. 2014\/10174, K. 2015\/1344, T. 09.02.2015 \u2013 E. 2001\/4292, K. 2001\/4674, T. 14.06.2001<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilirken, ihtiya\u00e7 i\u00e7indeki ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola kesintisiz \u015fekilde ula\u015fmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu \u201ckesintisizlik ilkesi\u201d uyar\u0131nca, ge\u00e7idin birden fazla ta\u015f\u0131nmazdan ge\u00e7mesi gerekiyorsa, bu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n tamam\u0131 davaya dahil edilmeli ve g\u00fczerg\u00e2h boyunca b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fck sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aksi h\u00e2lde ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n fiilen kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmaz ve verilen karar ge\u00e7ersiz h\u00e2le gelir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Karayoluna Ba\u011flan\u0131yorsa, G\u00fcvenlik ve Mevzuata Uygunluk Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131, Sorun Varsa Alternatif Yollar De\u011ferlendirilmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2013\/12778, K. 2014\/237, T. 07.01.2014<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it karayoluna \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yorsa, bu ba\u011flant\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenli ve mevzuata uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Karayollar\u0131 Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden sorulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Tehlike varsa, davac\u0131n\u0131n makul masraflarla bu sorunu giderip gideremeyece\u011fi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Sorun giderilemiyorsa, ba\u015fka ge\u00e7it alternatifleri de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. Hi\u00e7bir se\u00e7enek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse dava reddedilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Talebinde, \u00dczerinden Daha \u00d6nce Ge\u00e7it Kurulmu\u015f Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Varsa Bu G\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00d6ncelikle De\u011ferlendirilmeli ve Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k Bu Yolla \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 4780, K. 10271, T. 22.09.2014<\/p>\n
Zorunlu ge\u00e7it istemi de\u011ferlendirilirken, genel yola ula\u015fan se\u00e7enekler aras\u0131nda daha \u00f6nce ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilmi\u015f bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mevcutsa, bu g\u00fczerg\u00e2h di\u011fer ko\u015fullarla \u00e7eli\u015fmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece \u00f6ncelikle dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131 ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k m\u00fcmk\u00fcnse bu yolla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it G\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 Belirlenirken Yolun Devam\u0131nda da 2,5\u20133 Metre Geni\u015flik Sa\u011flanmal\u0131<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 16278, K. 1788, T. 12.02.2016 \u2013 E. 6038, K. 7803, T. 21.05.2013<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesisinde sadece ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 de\u011fil, ge\u00e7idin devam eden k\u0131sm\u0131nda da yeterli geni\u015fli\u011fin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme, g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 belirlerken en az 2,5\u20133 metre geni\u015flik sa\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zetmeli ve bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcye uygun bir karar vermelidir.<\/p>\n
\u0130frazla Olu\u015fan Parsellerin Yol \u0130htiyac\u0131 Ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131na Y\u00fcklenemez; Payda\u015flar Taksim S\u0131ras\u0131nda Ge\u00e7i\u015fi Sa\u011flamak Zorundad\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2001\/2233, K. 2001\/2804, T. 19.04.2001<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz payda\u015flar aras\u0131nda taksim edilerek ifraz ediliyorsa, her bir yeni parselin yola ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 planlanmal\u0131 ve ge\u00e7i\u015f hakk\u0131 o anda d\u00fczenlenmelidir. Bu sorumluluk payda\u015flara aittir. E\u011fer bu yap\u0131lmadan yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan parseller olu\u015fturulmu\u015fsa, sonradan kom\u015fu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7it talep edilemez.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda De\u011ferlendirme Ki\u015filere De\u011fil Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara G\u00f6re Yap\u0131l\u0131r; E\u015fin Parselinden Faydalan\u0131l\u0131yor Olmas\u0131 Davan\u0131n Reddine Gerek\u00e7e Olamaz<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 3285, K. 5219, T. 04.04.2013<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131n\u0131n taraflar\u0131n ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkilerine g\u00f6re de\u011fil, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n konumuna g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fine ait olan kom\u015fu parseli kullan\u0131yor olmas\u0131 veya bu parselin ana yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinin reddi i\u00e7in yeterli neden olu\u015fturmaz. Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkiler de\u011fil ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n hukuki ve fiil\u00ee durumu esas al\u0131narak tesis edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
K\u00fclt\u00fcr ve Tabiat Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Niteli\u011findeki Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardan Ge\u00e7it Talep Edilmeden \u00d6nce Koruma Kurulu\u2019ndan G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 67, K. 4005, T. 25.03.2014<\/p>\n
E\u011fer ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talep edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmaz tapuda k\u00fclt\u00fcr ve tabiat varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 olarak belirtilmi\u015fse, bu niteli\u011fin ge\u00e7it kurulmas\u0131na engel te\u015fkil edip etmedi\u011fi \u00f6ncelikle K\u00fclt\u00fcr ve Tabiat Varl\u0131klar\u0131 Koruma Kurulu’na sorulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Su Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Ancak Ba\u015fka Yerden Su Getirmek \u0130mk\u00e2ns\u0131z ya da A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 Masrafl\u0131ysa ve Ta\u015f\u0131nmaza Zarar Vermeyecek \u015eekilde Kurulabilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 1999\/946, K. 1999\/1602, T. 04.03.1999 \u2013 E. 2002\/3152, K. 2002\/3661, T. 10.05.2002<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, su ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilebilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fka bir g\u00fczerg\u00e2htan su getirme imk\u00e2n\u0131 olmamal\u0131 ya da bu yol ekonomik a\u00e7\u0131dan \u00e7ok b\u00fcy\u00fck bir y\u00fck getirmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca bu ge\u00e7it, daval\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 b\u00f6lmeyecek \u015fekilde planlanmal\u0131 ve kullan\u0131lacak mecra (boru) geni\u015fli\u011fi ihtiyaca orant\u0131l\u0131 olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Alternatifler ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmadan ve orant\u0131s\u0131z geni\u015flikte mecra irtifak\u0131 kurulmas\u0131 hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Mutlak ve Nispi Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Ayr\u0131m\u0131: Yolun Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Yeterli De\u011fildir, \u0130htiyac\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131lay\u0131p Kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 15779, K. 3896, T. 31.03.2016 | E. 9984, K. 10854, T. 25.09.2008 | E. 3016, K. 7139, T. 29.05.2014 | E. 2793, K. 4008, T. 25.03.2014<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde yaln\u0131zca yolun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011fil, bu yolun kullan\u0131m amac\u0131na uygunlu\u011fu da dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Tamamen yolsuz kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in mutlak ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131, mevcut yolu ihtiyac\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelmeyen ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in ise nispi ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 s\u00f6z konusudur.\u2028Kot fark\u0131, patika geni\u015fli\u011fi, yolun fiilen kullan\u0131lamaz olu\u015fu gibi unsurlar nedeniyle ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanamamas\u0131 durumunda, bu hususlar ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi incelemesi ile belirlenmeli; gerekiyorsa mevcut yol geni\u015fletilerek ya da onar\u0131larak ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Yolunun Her \u0130ki Yan\u0131na Duvar veya Tel \u00c7ekilerek Y\u00fckl\u00fc Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Malikinin Kendi Arazisine Eri\u015fimi Engellenemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2000\/2777, K. 2000\/3063, T. 02.05.2000 \u2013 E. 1988\/986, K. 1989\/3992, T. 17.04.1989<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kullan\u0131l\u0131rken, yararlanan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki ge\u00e7it yolunun her iki taraf\u0131n\u0131 kapatarak y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin kendi arazisine ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 engelleyemez. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, b\u00f6yle bir m\u00fcdahale, y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal eder ve hukuken korunamaz.<\/p>\n
L\u00fczumlu Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, Hizmet Veren Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00dczerindeki T\u00fcm Ayni Haklara \u00dcst\u00fcn Gelir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay \u0130BK, E. 1966\/22, K. 1968\/8, T. 29.04.1968 (RG: 01.06.1968, Say\u0131: 12913)<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Kurulu’na g\u00f6re, l\u00fczumlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 di\u011fer irtifak haklar\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 olarak, sadece m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fil, hizmet eden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerindeki t\u00fcm ayni haklar\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlar. Bu hak, rehin ve di\u011fer ayni irtifaklardan \u00f6nce gelir ve onlara \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck sa\u011flar.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talebi, Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n Tapuya Tescili ile Hukuken \u0130leri S\u00fcr\u00fclebilir Hale Gelir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. HD., E. 1990\/5966, K. 1990\/6122, T. 04.05.1990<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ayni haklar ancak tapuya tescil ile do\u011far. Bu nedenle, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n kazan\u0131lmas\u0131 tescile ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunulabilmesi i\u00e7in ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapuda tescilli olmas\u0131 gerekir. Tescil tamamlanmadan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez.<\/p>\n
Tapu tahsis belgesi m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 vermez; sadece ki\u015fisel hak sa\u011flar, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebine dayanak olamaz.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 13678, K. 73, T. 17.01.2011<\/p>\n
Tapu tahsis belgesi, m\u00fclkiyetin devrini sa\u011flamaz; yaln\u0131zca fiili kullan\u0131m hakk\u0131 tan\u0131r. Bu belgeye sahip ki\u015fi, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu uyar\u0131nca ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunamaz. Bu nedenle m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131na dayanmayan davac\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istemi reddedilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7i\u015fi Engelleyen Ka\u00e7ak Yap\u0131 Varsa Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 De\u011fil, Kal Davas\u0131 A\u00e7\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 12819, K. 461, T. 09.01.2014<\/p>\n
Bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kadastro yoluna cephesi bulunmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen bu yolun ka\u00e7ak yap\u0131la\u015fma nedeniyle kullan\u0131lamaz h\u00e2le gelmesi, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilmesini hakl\u0131 k\u0131lmaz.\u2028Bu durumda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken, yol \u00fczerindeki tecav\u00fcz\u00fcn \u00f6nlenmesi i\u00e7in ‘elatman\u0131n \u00f6nlenmesi’ veya ‘kal’ davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. Yolun daralt\u0131lmas\u0131 ya da i\u015fgal edilmesi gibi durumlar, \u00f6ncelikle mevcut yolun fiilen kullan\u0131labilir h\u00e2le getirilmesi yoluyla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmelidir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI BEDEL\u0130N\u0130N BEL\u0130RLENMES\u0130 \u2013 YARGITAY KR\u0130TERLER\u0130 \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Bedeli Tam De\u011fil, \u0130rtifak Bedelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/11002 E., 2006\/14234 K., 01.12.2006<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6denecek bedel, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 olan tam bedel de\u011fil, yaln\u0131zca irtifak hakk\u0131 nedeniyle do\u011fan s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 kullan\u0131ma dair bedeldir.\u2028<\/p>\n
2. Bedel Ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i, G\u00fcncel ve Karar Tarihine Yak\u0131n Olmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/2116 E., 2006\/3531 K., 27.03.2006\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2006\/2899 E., 2006\/6087 K., 18.04.2013<\/p>\n
Bedel, karar tarihine en yak\u0131n tarihli ve rayice uygun \u015fekilde belirlenmelidir. Mahkeme s\u00fcreci uzam\u0131\u015fsa yeniden de\u011ferleme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028<\/p>\n
3. Bedel \u00d6nceden Belirlenmeli ve Karardan \u00d6nce Depo Edilmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2002\/8522 E., 2002\/8306 K., 09.12.2002<\/p>\n
Bedel, bilirki\u015fi raporuyla objektif kriterlere g\u00f6re hesaplanmal\u0131 ve mahkeme karar\u0131ndan \u00f6nce ge\u00e7ici olarak mahkeme veznesine yat\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. De\u011fer Kayb\u0131 ve Kullan\u0131m Azalmas\u0131 Bedeline Eklenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2013\/2631 E., 2013\/4363 K., 21.03.2013<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmazda olu\u015fan de\u011fer kayb\u0131, \u00f6zellikle ge\u00e7it sebebiyle kullan\u0131lamaz h\u00e2le gelen k\u0131s\u0131mlar varsa, ayr\u0131ca bedelle yans\u0131t\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
5. A\u011fa\u00e7 ve Muhdesat Bedeli de Dikkate Al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2015\/15639 E., 2016\/1556 K., 08.02.2016\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2019\/2862 E., 2019\/7432 K., 07.11.2019\u2028Ge\u00e7it alan\u0131nda a\u011fa\u00e7, yap\u0131 veya tesis varsa, bunlar\u0131n de\u011feri de bedelde dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028<\/p>\n
6. \u00d6nceki Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131na Ba\u011flant\u0131 Kurulmu\u015fsa, \u00d6nceki Bedel D\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., 2010\/14613 E., 2010\/625 K., 01.06.2010<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it, daha \u00f6nce kurulmu\u015f bir ge\u00e7it g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131ysa, \u00f6nceki bedel d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yeni bedel hesaplanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Ge\u00e7it T\u00fcr\u00fc ve Gereklili\u011fi Belirlenmeden Bedel Belirlenemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay HGK., 1994\/848 E., 1995\/75 K., 15.02.1995\u2028Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 mutlak m\u0131, nispi mi? Yol yoklu\u011fu mu, yetersizli\u011fi mi var? Bu belirlenmeden do\u011frudan bedel belirlenemez.<\/p>\n
8.\u0130rtifak hakk\u0131 nedeniyle olu\u015fan de\u011fer kayb\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirli oranlar\u0131 ge\u00e7emez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 18. HD, E. 2005\/7450, K. 2005\/5634, T. 20.09.2005<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmazda kurulan irtifak hakk\u0131 sebebiyle meydana gelecek de\u011fer kayb\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. Arazilerde bu oran en fazla %35, arsalarda ise en fazla %50 olarak uygulanabilir. Bu oranlar, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n cins ve niteli\u011fine uygun kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 etkilemeyen durumlar i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli olup, bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131r \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fc olarak dikkate al\u0131nmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9.Ge\u00e7it bedeli, dava tarihi de\u011fil, h\u00fckme en yak\u0131n tarihe g\u00f6re belirlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 2005\/7499, K. 2005\/9154, T. 18.10.2005<\/p>\n
Dava ile karar tarihi aras\u0131nda uzun bir s\u00fcre ge\u00e7mi\u015fse, de\u011fi\u015fen ekonomik ko\u015fullar, enflasyon ve paran\u0131n al\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it bedelinin objektif kriterlerle g\u00fcncel rayi\u00e7lere g\u00f6re yeniden belirlenmesi gerekir. Dava tarihine g\u00f6re belirlenen bedel, hakkaniyete ve g\u00fcncel de\u011fere uygun d\u00fc\u015fmez. Bu sebeple mahkemece h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n de\u011ferin esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n
10.Ge\u00e7it bedeli, dava tarihi de\u011fil, h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n rayi\u00e7 de\u011fer esas al\u0131narak belirlenmelidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, 18.10.2005, E. 2005\/7499, K. 2005\/9154<\/p>\n
Dava ile karar tarihi aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en uzun s\u00fcre, de\u011fi\u015fen ekonomik yap\u0131, enflasyon ve paran\u0131n al\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it bedelinin objektif kriterlere g\u00f6re yeniden belirlenmesini gerektirir. Dava tarihine g\u00f6re tespit edilen bedel, hakkaniyete ve g\u00fcncel piyasa de\u011ferine uygun d\u00fc\u015fmez. Bu sebeple, mahkemece h\u00fck\u00fcm tarihine en yak\u0131n tarihli rayi\u00e7 de\u011fer esas al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 bedeli, karar verilmeden \u00f6nce mahkeme veznesine depo edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, 02.04.2008, E. 2008\/3282, K. 2008\/4474<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesisinde, y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikinin bedelin tahsili i\u00e7in ayr\u0131ca dava a\u00e7mak zorunda kalmamas\u0131 ve ek k\u00fclfetlerle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in, saptanan ge\u00e7it bedelinin h\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce mahkeme veznesine depo edilmesi zorunludur. Bu, hem hukuki g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hem de fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkesini sa\u011flar.<\/p>\n
KAMU TA\u015eINMAZLARINDA GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI<\/p>\n
Kamu Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131ndan Kal\u0131c\u0131 Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Kurulamaz; Zorunlu H\u00e2lde Sadece Ge\u00e7ici Kullan\u0131m \u0130zni Al\u0131nabilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 13. HD., E. 2011\/7678, K. 2011\/8746, T. 04.07.2011<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamakt\u0131r; ancak orman ve benzeri kamu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 \u00fczerinde \u00f6zel m\u00fclkiyet kurulamayaca\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in bu yerlerde kal\u0131c\u0131 ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tesis edilemez. Fiil\u00ee imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131k varsa, yaln\u0131zca ilgili kurumdan ge\u00e7ici kullan\u0131m izni al\u0131nabilir ve bu da tapuya i\u015flenemez.<\/p>\n
Tapusuz Devlet Arazilerinden Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 \u0130stenemez, \u00d6nce Tescil Gerekir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 11904, K. 13035, T. 19.11.2009\u2028Orman s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan veya tapusuz olan devlet arazilerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istenebilmesi i\u00e7in, \u00f6ncelikle bu yerlerin ilgili kurum ad\u0131na tapuya tescili gerekir. Tescil yap\u0131lmadan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulamaz. Tescil m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011filse, davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fka tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlardan ge\u00e7it sa\u011flan\u0131p sa\u011flanamayaca\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Meralardan Ge\u00e7it Verilemez, Ba\u015fka G\u00fczerg\u00e2hlar Ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 5270, K. 6486, T. 06.06.2006\u2028Kamuya ait meralardan ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 verilemez. Bu durumda mahkeme, ba\u015fka uygun yollar olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131, ke\u015fif yapmal\u0131 ve etrafl\u0131 bir bilirki\u015fi raporu alarak karar vermelidir.<\/p>\n
Dere yata\u011f\u0131ndan ge\u00e7i\u015f gerekiyorsa, davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u00f6pr\u00fc masraf\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmesi \u015fart\u0131yla ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nabilir.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 595, K. 777, T. 22.01.2015<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it talebi de\u011ferlendirilirken, \u00e7evredeki yollar\u0131 g\u00f6steren geni\u015f paftalar getirtilerek genel yola ula\u015f\u0131m sa\u011flayabilecek t\u00fcm alternatifler ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer bu ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar sonucunda davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131ndan sadece dere yata\u011f\u0131 \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7i\u015fle ba\u011flant\u0131 sa\u011flanabiliyorsa ve davac\u0131 k\u00f6pr\u00fc yapma masraf\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmeyi kabul etmi\u015fse, talep etti\u011fi g\u00fczerg\u00e2h \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Tapuda Kay\u0131tl\u0131 Olmayan veya Kadastro G\u00f6rmemi\u015f Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar \u00dczerinden Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talep Edilemez<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2017\/5274, K. 2018\/254, T. 15.01.2018<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinde bulunulabilmesi i\u00e7in hem yararlanan hem de y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapuda tescilli olmas\u0131 gerekir. Kadastro g\u00f6rmemi\u015f ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n zilyedinden ge\u00e7it talep edilemez. Devletin h\u00fck\u00fcm ve tasarrufunda kalan, tescil d\u0131\u015f\u0131 b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulabilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle ilgili idare ad\u0131na tescil i\u015fleminin tamamlanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 \u015fartt\u0131r. Uzun s\u00fcreli zilyetlik h\u00e2linde ise TMK m. 713 uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131lacak tapu iptal ve tescil davas\u0131 sonucu olu\u015fan m\u00fclkiyet kazan\u0131m\u0131 sonras\u0131nda ge\u00e7it talebi g\u00fcndeme gelebilir.<\/p>\n
\u0130mar Plan\u0131nda Yol \u00d6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f Olsa da Fiilen A\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131k\u00e7a Ge\u00e7it \u0130htiyac\u0131 Devam Eder<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay HGK, E. 1980\/14-2083, K. 1983\/601, T. 01.06.1983<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 1999\/431, K. 1999\/2220, T. 23.03.1999<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n imar plan\u0131nda yola cepheli g\u00f6z\u00fckmesi, o yoldan hen\u00fcz fiilen ve hukuken yararlan\u0131lam\u0131yorsa, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. Sadece planda yer al\u0131yor olmas\u0131, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n reddi i\u00e7in yeterli say\u0131lmaz; yolun fiilen a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve kullan\u0131l\u0131r h\u00e2le gelmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
\u0130mar Uygulamas\u0131yla Yolu Kapanan Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u0130\u00e7in Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Talep Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2003\/6317, K. 2003\/8221, T. 18.11.2003 \u2013 E. 2012\/10286, K. 2012\/12270, T. 30.10.2012<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019a g\u00f6re, ba\u015fta yola cephesi olan ancak imar uygulamas\u0131yla yolu kapanan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 istenebilir. Planlara g\u00f6re yola \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmayan parseller olu\u015fturulamaz; b\u00f6yle bir durum varsa ta\u015f\u0131nmaz ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 i\u00e7indedir. Bu durumda en uygun kom\u015fudan ya da en az zarar g\u00f6recek olandan ge\u00e7it istenebilir.<\/p>\n
Zaruri H\u00e2llerde Yol Olarak Kullan\u0131lan Kuru Dere Yata\u011f\u0131na Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Tesis Edilebilir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2001\/727, K. 2001\/1152, T. 16.02.2001, Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2016\/13709, K. 2019\/4979, T. 30.05.2019<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talebinin zaruri h\u00e2llerde de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini, bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layabilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k olan kuru dere yata\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, fiilen yol olarak kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kullan\u0131m\u0131nda sak\u0131nca bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde ge\u00e7it g\u00fczerg\u00e2h\u0131 olarak kabul edilebilece\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ YER\u0130N\u0130N DE\u011e\u0130\u015eT\u0130R\u0130LMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u0130rtifak Yerinin De\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi, Y\u00fckl\u00fc Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz Malikinin Talebiyle ve Belirli \u015eartlarla M\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2007\/6715, K. 2007\/8327, T. 26.06.2007\u2028Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n genel yola ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in kurulur ve y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki bu ge\u00e7i\u015fe katlanmak zorundad\u0131r. Ancak zamanla ko\u015fullar de\u011fi\u015firse, TMK m.791 uyar\u0131nca y\u00fckl\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliki ge\u00e7it yerinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesini isteyebilir. Bunun i\u00e7in:<\/p>\n
1. Mevcut ge\u00e7it ciddi zorluk \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131yor olmal\u0131,<\/p>\n
2. Yeni ge\u00e7it yolu, yararlanan ki\u015fiye \u00f6nemli zarar vermemeli,<\/p>\n
3. Yeni g\u00fczerg\u00e2h ayn\u0131 i\u015flevi g\u00f6rebilecek durumda olmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u2028Bu \u00fc\u00e7 \u015fart birlikte varsa, ge\u00e7it yeri de\u011fi\u015ftirilebilir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ TERK\u0130N\u0130<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz b\u00f6l\u00fcnse de t\u00fcm parseller \u00fczerinde devam eder.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, E. 2008\/18-317, K. 2008\/332, T. 16.04.2008<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it irtifak\u0131 kurulan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz daha sonra parseller h\u00e2linde b\u00f6l\u00fcnse bile, irtifak hakk\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcnmezli\u011fi ilkesi gere\u011fi her parsel \u00fczerinde ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini korur. Ancak sadece belirli parseller \u00fczerinde kullan\u0131l\u0131yorsa, kullan\u0131lmayan di\u011fer parsellerin malikleri irtifak\u0131n terkinini talep edebilir. Tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, bu talebi irtifak hakk\u0131 sahibine bildirir; itiraz edilirse mahkemeden terkin karar\u0131 al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, kesin ve s\u00fcrekli faydas\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015fse terkin edilebilir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 2002\/899, K. 2002\/1401, T. 01.03.2002<\/p>\n
E\u011fer ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 zamanla amac\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015f, hak sahibine art\u0131k bir yarar sa\u011flam\u0131yorsa, terkini talep edilebilir. Sadece fiilen kullan\u0131lan bir yolun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131, o yerin \u201cgenel yol\u201d olarak kabul\u00fcn\u00fc sa\u011flamaz. Bu nedenle, hukuki niteli\u011fi olmayan bir kullan\u0131m ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131 sona erdirmez.<\/p>\n
Yeni parselin yola cepheli olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ge\u00e7it ihtiyac\u0131 ortadan kalkar.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 1999\/4339, K. 1999\/5364, T. 16.09.1999<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131, daha sonra yola cepheli bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131n alm\u0131\u015f ve ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131na ihtiya\u00e7 kalmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenle, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 k\u00fclfetinin devam etmesi hakkaniyete ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n yeni durumu dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n sona erdi\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 sona erse bile \u00f6denmi\u015f bedelin tamam\u0131 iade edilmez.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD, E. 1999\/2902, K. 1999\/3465, T. 10.05.1999<\/p>\n
Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n sona ermesi durumunda, \u00f6nceki d\u00f6nemde sa\u011flanan kullan\u0131m avantaj\u0131 nedeniyle, \u00f6denen bedelin tamam\u0131n\u0131n iadesine karar verilmesi gerekmez. Bu konuda hakkaniyet ilkesi g\u00f6zetilmelidir.<\/p>\n
GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKI DAVA S\u00dcREC\u0130 HAKKINDA<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda G\u00f6revli Mahkeme Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesidir<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 103, K. 2308, T. 03.03.2015<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin davalar, TMK m.747 uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131r ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmesinden sonra a\u00e7\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr davalarda g\u00f6revli mahkeme asliye hukuk mahkemesidir. Bu nedenle, sulh hukuk mahkemesince esas hakk\u0131nda karar verilmesi usule ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r; g\u00f6revsizlik karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulsa da yarg\u0131lama giderleri ve vek\u00e2let \u00fccreti davac\u0131 \u00fczerinde kal\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 29, K. 3095, T. 10.03.2016 \u2013 E. 2017\/3037, K. 2021\/752, T. 09.02.2021<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131, taraflar aras\u0131nda haks\u0131zl\u0131k esas\u0131na de\u011fil, ihtiya\u00e7 ve fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesine dayan\u0131r. Bu nedenle, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilse dahi, yarg\u0131lama giderleri ile vek\u00e2let \u00fccreti davac\u0131 \u00fczerinde b\u0131rak\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Zorunlu Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Davalar\u0131nda Taraflara \u0130li\u015fkin Kriterler (Elbirli\u011fi \/ Payl\u0131 M\u00fclkiyet)<\/p>\n
1. Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetinde t\u00fcm maliklerin birlikte hareket etmesi gerekir.\u2028TMK m. 640\/2 gere\u011fince, miras\u00e7\u0131lar terekeye elbirli\u011fiyle sahip olurlar. Bu nedenle elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyetine konu bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz lehine ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 kurulmas\u0131 isteniyorsa, t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n birlikte dava a\u00e7mas\u0131 gerekir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 11681, K. 1342, T. 15.02.2016\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 15779, K. 3896, T. 31.03.2016<\/p>\n
2. Elbirli\u011fi m\u00fclkiyeti h\u00e2linde, yaln\u0131z bir payda\u015f dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015fsa mahkeme hemen ret karar\u0131 veremez.\u2028Di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131n davaya kat\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre verilmeli; bu m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmazsa miras \u015firketine temsilci atanmas\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmelidir.\u2028Samsun BAM, 1. HD., E. 2022\/2321, K. 2022\/2318, T. 04.10.2022<\/p>\n
3. Payl\u0131 m\u00fclkiyette her payda\u015f dava a\u00e7abilir.\u2028Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ekonomik i\u015flevini art\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve b\u00f6l\u00fcnemeyen ortak menfaate hizmet etti\u011fi i\u00e7in her payda\u015f, di\u011ferlerini temsilen bu hakk\u0131 talep edebilir.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay HGK, E. 2002\/3187, K. 3559, T. 07.05.2002\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2002\/6922, K. 2002\/8706, T. 19.12.2002\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2005\/5198, K. 2005\/7254, T. 24.07.2005<\/p>\n
4. S\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee hak sahiplerinin davaya kat\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek yoktur.\u2028Zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, hizmet veren ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki t\u00fcm s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee haklar\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcnde gelir. Bu nedenle, irtifak s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine veya mahkeme karar\u0131na s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayn\u00ee hak sahiplerinin r\u0131za g\u00f6stermesi aranmaz; onlara kar\u015f\u0131 husumet y\u00f6neltilmesine gerek yoktur.\u2028Yarg\u0131tay \u0130BK, E. 1966\/22, K. 1968\/8, T. 29.04.1968 (RG: 01.06.1968, Say\u0131: 12913)<\/p>\n
Talep Edilenden Ba\u015fka Parselden Ge\u00e7it Verilecekse, Yeni Malikler Davaya Dahil Edilmelidir\u2028Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 4001, K. 6100, T. 19.04.2013<\/p>\n
Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 davalar\u0131nda mahkeme, davac\u0131n\u0131n talep etti\u011fi yer d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda daha uygun bir g\u00fczerg\u00e2h belirleyebilir. Bu yeni g\u00fczerg\u00e2hta yer alan parsel maliklerine ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta dava a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da, bu durum kabul edilebilir bir yan\u0131lg\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu nedenle HMK m.124 uyar\u0131nca, yeni ta\u015f\u0131nmaz maliklerinin har\u00e7s\u0131z \u015fekilde davaya d\u00e2hil edilmesine izin verilmelidir.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaza sahip olmak, ona ula\u015fam\u0131yorsak yeterli de\u011fildir. E\u011fer bir arsa ya da tarla anayola \u00e7\u0131kam\u0131yorsa ya da mevcut yol ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lam\u0131yorsa, o m\u00fclkiyetin de\u011feri d\u00fc\u015fer, kullan\u0131m\u0131 zorla\u015f\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu gibi durumlarda ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 devreye girer. Kom\u015fu parsellerden ge\u00e7erek anayola ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in mahkemeden veya r\u0131zayla ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 talep edilebilir. Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131 bazen taraflar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle kurulmak istendi\u011finde, bu hakk\u0131n ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in tapuya tescil edilmesi gerekir. Di\u011fer yandan, uygulamada en \u00e7ok kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131lan durum, ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n dava yoluyla talep edilmesidir. Bu yaz\u0131da, \u00f6zellikle zorunlu ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n hangi \u015fartlarda kurulabilece\u011fini, kimlerin bu hakk\u0131 isteyebilece\u011fini, bedelin nas\u0131l belirlenece\u011fini ve ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131n\u0131n ne zaman sona erece\u011fini Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131yla birlikte sade bir \u015fekilde anlataca\u011f\u0131z. GE\u00c7\u0130T HAKKININ TANIMI VE UYGULAMA KAPSAMI Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131 Belirlenirken Taraf Yararlar\u0131, Kom\u015fuluk Hukuku ve Fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Dengesi G\u00f6zetilmelidir Yarg\u0131tay 14. HD., E. 2006\/11050, K. 2007\/13333, T. 14.02.2006 Ge\u00e7it hakk\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetini s\u0131n\u0131rlayan ve kom\u015fuluk hukukuna dayanan bir irtifak t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bu nedenle g\u00fczerg\u00e2h belirlenirken davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fisel tercihlerinden ziyade ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n niteli\u011fi, ge\u00e7i\u015fin hangi ara\u00e7larla yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi objektif \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmal\u0131; taraf menfaatleri dengelenerek fedak\u00e2rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n denkle\u015ftirilmesi ilkesi g\u00f6zetilmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131nmaz malikine a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 k\u00fclfet y\u00fcklenmemesi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7it bedeli mahkeme karar\u0131 verilmeden \u00f6nce vezneye yat\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ge\u00e7it Hakk\u0131, En Az Zarar Verecek ve Y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc En …<\/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-141632","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n