There Is No Error In The Legal And Legal Grounds On Which The Verdict Is Based And In The Evaluation Of The Evidence
T.C. JUDICIARY
1st Civil Chamber
Basis: 2014/16696
Decision: 2016/5804
Date of Decision: 10.09.2016
DEED CANCELLATION AND REGISTRATION CASE – THERE IS NO INCONSISTENCY IN THE LEGAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT IS BASED AND IN THE EVALUATION OF THE EVIDENCE – CONFIRMATION OF THE JUDGMENT
SUMMARY: In the case regarding the cancellation and registration of the title deed, there is no inconsistency in the content of the file, the evidence collected, the legal and legal grounds on which the judgment is based, and the appreciation of the evidence. It is decided to uphold the judgment.
(1086 S. K. art. 436) (6100 S. K. Geç. art. 3)
Case and Decision: In the case between the parties;
The plaintiff, in order to sell his (8/112) share in the immovable property numbered 512 block 12 parcel (8/112), appointed ……, one of the defendants, as his attorney on 15/08/2003 and dismissed him from the attorneyship on 14/06/2004 upon necessity, and although the dismissal letter was notified to the attorney on 17/06/2004, his share was transferred by the attorney to the other defendant … and the sale price was not paid, and the defendants acted in collusion and cooperation, and requested a decision for the cancellation of the title deed and registration in his name, and if not, the collection of the sale price.
The defendant … sold the immovable property to the other defendant for 10.000-TL by proxy, the promissory note amounting to 7.000-TL given to the plaintiff as the sale price was put into execution and 9.000-TL was paid to the plaintiff’s attorney together with the expenses, when the power of attorney was issued, the plaintiff paid 2. 000-TL by hand when the power of attorney was issued, a total of 11.000-TL was paid to the plaintiff as the sale price, there was no exchange of money with the plaintiff other than the sale of the immovable, the defendant …, upon the advertisement of the apartment for sale, purchased the apartment, which was in rough construction and abandoned, at the end of 2003 for 9. 500-TL in late 2003, 4.500-TL was paid as jewelery and 5.000-TL was paid with a check with a maturity date of 10/04/2004, but the other defendant delayed them about the transfer of the title deed, the transfer could be achieved on 04/08/2004, he spent 17. 000-TL on the immovable property after the transfer, that it was not possible for them to act in good faith and in collusion with the other defendant and to know that he was dismissed from the attorneyship, that he was the real victim and defended the dismissal of the lawsuit.
The court decided to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that the claim could not be proven.
The decision was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney in due time and with a request for a hearing, the request for a hearing was rejected on merit; the report of the Examining Judge … was read and his opinion was taken. The file was examined, the necessity was discussed and considered.
Conclusion: Based on the file content, the evidence collected, the legal and legal grounds on which the judgment is based, the absence of any inaccuracy in the appreciation of the evidence, and in particular, the allegation of abuse of power of attorney could not be proved, the assignment was for a price, the plaintiff collected the price through the execution channel, essentially this issue ….. Since there is no inconsistency in the establishment of the judgment as written by determining that it was accepted by the plaintiff in the session dated 03/05/2006 of the case numbered 2005/1132 E. of the Criminal Court of First Instance; the plaintiff’s appeal objection is not appropriate. It was unanimously decided on 10.05.2016 to approve the judgment, which is in accordance with the procedure and the law, and to collect the following 4.00.-TL balance approval fee from the appellant.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.