Request For Return Of Expropriated Immovable Due To Misuse
PUBLICIZATION
The seizure by the administration of all or part of the immovable property in private ownership is called expropriation. The main reason for granting this power to the administration is the public services they are obliged to perform.
Article 46 of the 1982 Constitution [Amended: 3.10.2011]: The State and public legal entities are authorized to expropriate all or part of the immovable properties in private ownership and to establish administrative easements on them according to the principles and procedures specified by law, provided that they pay their real value in advance in cases where public interest requires it.
Article 3 of the Expropriation Law No. 2942: Administrations may expropriate immovable properties, resources and easement rights required for the execution of public services or undertakings that they are obliged to carry out by law or Presidential decree, by paying their value in cash and in advance or in equal installments in the following cases.
Accordingly, the main features of expropriation are as follows
It occurs when the public interest requires it.
The price must be paid in cash and in advance or, in some cases, in equal installments.
The State or public legal entities are authorized to expropriate.
All or part of the immovable property may be expropriated.
Sample Petition Requesting the Return of Expropriated Immovable Property Due to Misuse
TO THE JUDGE OF THE … CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
THE PLAINTIFF
TC ID NUMBER :
ADDRESS :
PROVISIONAL :
ADDRESS :
DEFENDANT:
ADDRESS :
SUBJECT : It is our request for the return of the expropriated immovable property due to misuse.
A P P L A C T I O N S
1-) While the immovable property numbered 52 block 5 parcel was registered in the name of the client in the title deed, with the decision of the General Directorate of Foundations Foundations Council dated …/…/… (Annex-1) B…. Agha C…. A…. Foundation f….. k…. C…. A…. (S….) madrasah was expropriated for the purpose of reconstruction and restoration of the surrounding buildings in accordance with the original in order to fully reveal the appearance of the madrasah, to prevent damage from the environment and to restore the building to its original state within its historical environment.
2-) The price difference awarded in the price increase case filed by the client against the defendant administration and finalized on …/…/…/… is still in the possession of the defendant administration.
3-) The defendant administration, which actually seized the immovable on …/…/…/…, has not taken any action and facility in accordance with the purpose of expropriation within five years from the date of …/…/…/…, when the expropriation price was finalized, has left the immovable as it is and has generated income by renting it out, has filed a lawsuit for ecrimisil against the client’s spouse who uses the lower floor of the building on the immovable as a barber shop, and the second floor is still under the rent of an Information Technologies company.
4-) Article 23 of the Expropriation Law No. 2942 stipulates that “Within five years from the date of finalization of the expropriation price, if the administration that made the expropriation or the administration to which the transfer or allocation was made in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22; If no action or installation is carried out in accordance with the purpose of expropriation and transfer, or if the immovable property is left as it is by not allocating it to a need for public benefit, the owner or his heirs can take back the immovable property by paying the expropriation price together with the legal interest to be processed from the day they receive it.” The conditions in the article have been realized in the case in question.
5-) For the reasons we have explained, it has become necessary to file a lawsuit in order to cancel the title deed of the immovable in the name of the administration within the procedures and principles set forth in the provision of the law and to ensure that the immovable is registered in the title deed in the name of the client.
LEGAL GROUNDS : Article 23 of Law No. 2942.
LEGAL EVIDENCES : 1-)The decision of the Foundations Council of the General Directorate of Foundations dated …/…/…
2-) The price increase case file finalized on …/…/…
3-) Lawsuit filed against the client’s spouse for ecrimisil
4-) Expert Examination
5-) Discovery
CONCLUSION AND REQUEST : For the reasons we have explained above, since the … TL awarded in the price increase case has not been collected from the defendant administration, this amount should be excluded from the calculation, and the amount initially paid to the client … We respectfully request on behalf of our client that the amount to be found as a result of the calculation to be made, the court costs incurred by the client at the beginning and the revenues obtained by the defendant administration outside the purpose of expropriation be deducted from the amount to be found as a result of the calculation to be made, and the amount to be determined accordingly, and that the judicial expenses and attorney fees be imposed on the other party. …/ …/ …
ANNEXES : 1-)The decision of the General Directorate of Foundations, Foundations Council dated …/…/…
2-) The price increase case file finalized on …/…/…/…
3-) Lawsuit filed against the client’s spouse for ecrimisil
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Related to.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.