{"id":4258,"date":"2023-04-06T17:05:01","date_gmt":"2023-04-06T14:05:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/?p=4258"},"modified":"2026-03-19T14:56:28","modified_gmt":"2026-03-19T11:56:28","slug":"hukuk-muhakemesinde-hile-hata-korkutma-gabin-inancli-islem-kavramlari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/hukuk-muhakemesinde-hile-hata-korkutma-gabin-inancli-islem-kavramlari\/","title":{"rendered":"TAPU \u0130PTAL ve TESC\u0130L DAVALARINDA &#8220;\u0130RADE SAKATLI\u011eI&#8221; ; &#8221;H\u0130LE&#8221; (Aldatma) &#8211; &#8221;HATA&#8221; (Yan\u0131lma)- &#8221;KORKUTMA&#8221; (\u0130krah)- &#8221;GAB\u0130N&#8221; (A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 Yararlanma) ve &#8221;\u0130NAN\u00c7LI \u0130\u015eLEM&#8221; KAVRAMLARI"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>6098 Say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">F. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fi<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>I. S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 26-<\/span> <\/strong>Taraflar, bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fini kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde \u00f6zg\u00fcrce belirleyebilirler.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">II. Kesin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 27-<\/span> <\/strong>Kanunun emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine, ahlaka, kamu d\u00fczenine, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 veya konusu imk\u00e2ns\u0131z olan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler kesin olarak h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczd\u00fcr. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7erdi\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcmlerden bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz olmas\u0131, di\u011ferlerinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkilemez. Ancak, bu h\u00fck\u00fcmler olmaks\u0131z\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131rsa, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin tamam\u0131 kesin olarak h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz olur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">III. A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanma<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 28-<\/span> <\/strong>Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 edimler aras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir orans\u0131zl\u0131k varsa, bu orans\u0131zl\u0131k, zarar g\u00f6renin zor durumda kalmas\u0131ndan veya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizli\u011finden ya da deneyimsizli\u011finden yararlan\u0131lmak suretiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi takdirde, zarar g\u00f6ren, durumun \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re ya s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 di\u011fer tarafa bildirerek ediminin geri verilmesini ya da s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 kalarak edimler aras\u0131ndaki orans\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesini isteyebilir. Zarar g\u00f6ren bu hakk\u0131n\u0131, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik veya deneyimsizli\u011fini \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi; zor durumda kalmada ise, bu durumun ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l ve her h\u00e2lde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kuruldu\u011fu tarihten ba\u015flayarak be\u015f y\u0131l i\u00e7inde kullanabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>G. \u0130rade bozukluklar\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>I. Yan\u0131lma<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. Yan\u0131lman\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcmleri<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 30-<\/strong><\/span> S\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulurken esasl\u0131 yan\u0131lmaya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">2. Yan\u0131lma h\u00e2lleri<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #008000;\">a. A\u00e7\u0131klamada yan\u0131lma<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 31-<\/strong> <\/span>\u00d6zellikle a\u015fa\u011f\u0131da say\u0131lan yan\u0131lma h\u00e2lleri esasl\u0131d\u0131r:<br \/>\n1. Yan\u0131lan, kurulmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fmeden ba\u015fka bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7in iradesini a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015fsa.<br \/>\n2. Yan\u0131lan, istedi\u011finden ba\u015fka bir konu i\u00e7in iradesini a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015fsa.<br \/>\n3. Yan\u0131lan, s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma iradesini, ger\u00e7ekte s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmak istedi\u011fi ki\u015fiden ba\u015fkas\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015fsa.<br \/>\n4. Yan\u0131lan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yaparken belirli nitelikleri olan bir ki\u015fiyi dikkate almas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fka bir ki\u015fi i\u00e7in iradesini a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015fsa.<br \/>\n5. Yan\u0131lan, ger\u00e7ekte \u00fcstlenmek istedi\u011finden \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde fazla bir edim i\u00e7in veya ger\u00e7ekte istedi\u011finden \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde az bir kar\u015f\u0131 edim i\u00e7in iradesini a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015fsa.<br \/>\nBasit hesap yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkilemez; bunlar\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesi ile yetinilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>b. Saikte yan\u0131lma<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 32-<\/strong><\/span> Saikte yan\u0131lma, esasl\u0131 yan\u0131lma say\u0131lmaz. Yan\u0131lan\u0131n, yan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 saiki s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin temeli saymas\u0131 ve bunun da i\u015f ili\u015fkilerinde ge\u00e7erli d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131na uygun olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde yan\u0131lma esasl\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r. Ancak bu durumun kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u00e7a da bilinebilir olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>c. \u0130letmede yan\u0131lma<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 33-<\/span> <\/strong>S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik iradenin haberci veya \u00e7evirmen gibi bir arac\u0131 ya da bir ara\u00e7 taraf\u0131ndan yanl\u0131\u015f iletilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde de yan\u0131lma h\u00fck\u00fcmleri uygulan\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>3. Yan\u0131lmada d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 34-<\/span> <\/strong>Yan\u0131lan, yan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak ileri s\u00fcremez. \u00d6zellikle di\u011fer taraf\u0131n, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yan\u0131lan\u0131n kasdetti\u011fi anlamda kurulmas\u0131na raz\u0131 oldu\u011funu bildirmesi durumunda, s\u00f6zle\u015fme bu anlamda kurulmu\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>4. Yan\u0131lmada kusur<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 35-<\/strong><\/span> Yan\u0131lan, yan\u0131lmas\u0131nda kusurlu ise, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011fan zarar\u0131 gidermekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ancak, di\u011fer taraf yan\u0131lmay\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa, tazminat istenemez. H\u00e2kim, hakkaniyetin gerektirdi\u011fi durumlarda, ifadan beklenen yarar\u0131 a\u015fmamak kayd\u0131yla, daha fazla tazminata h\u00fckmedebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>II. Aldatma<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 36-<\/span> <\/strong>Taraflardan biri, di\u011ferinin aldatmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa, yan\u0131lmas\u0131 esasl\u0131 olmasa bile, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015finin aldatmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n aldatmay\u0131 bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>III. Korkutma<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. H\u00fckm\u00fc<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 37-<\/strong><\/span> Taraflardan biri, di\u011ferinin veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015finin korkutmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Korkutan bir \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi olup da di\u011fer taraf korkutmay\u0131 bilmiyorsa veya bilecek durumda de\u011filse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 kalmak istemeyen korkutulan, hakkaniyet gerektiriyorsa, di\u011fer tarafa tazminat \u00f6demekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">2. Ko\u015fullar\u0131<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 38-<\/span><\/strong> Korkutulan, i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu durum bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kendisinin veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131ndan birinin ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na ya da malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik a\u011f\u0131r ve yak\u0131n bir zarar tehlikesinin do\u011fdu\u011funa inanmakta hakl\u0131 ise, korkutma ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Bir hakk\u0131n veya kanundan do\u011fan bir yetkinin kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 korkutmas\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, bu hakk\u0131 veya yetkiyi kullanaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klayan\u0131n, di\u011fer taraf\u0131n zor durumda kalmas\u0131ndan a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 bir menfaat sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, korkutman\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>IV. \u0130rade bozuklu\u011funun giderilmesi<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 39-<\/span><\/strong> Yan\u0131lma veya aldatma sebebiyle ya da korkutulma sonucunda s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, yan\u0131lma veya aldatmay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi ya da korkutman\u0131n etkisinin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmez veya verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri istemezse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi onam\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Aldatma veya korkutmadan dolay\u0131 ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 olmayan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin onanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131, tazminat hakk\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>C. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>I. Kural<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 72-<\/strong><\/span> Tazminat istemi, zarar g\u00f6renin zarar\u0131 ve tazminat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcs\u00fcn\u00fc \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak iki y\u0131l\u0131n ve her h\u00e2lde fiilin i\u015flendi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak on y\u0131l\u0131n ge\u00e7mesiyle zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frar. Ancak, tazminat ceza kanunlar\u0131n\u0131n daha uzun bir zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc cezay\u0131 gerektiren bir fiilden do\u011fmu\u015fsa, bu zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 uygulan\u0131r. Haks\u0131z fiil dolay\u0131s\u0131yla zarar g\u00f6ren bak\u0131m\u0131ndan bir bor\u00e7 do\u011fmu\u015fsa zarar g\u00f6ren, haks\u0131z fiilden do\u011fan tazminat istemi zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olsa bile, her zaman bu borcu ifadan ka\u00e7\u0131nabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">II. R\u00fccu isteminde<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 73-<\/strong> <\/span>R\u00fccu istemi, tazminat\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dendi\u011fi ve birlikte sorumlu ki\u015finin \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak iki y\u0131l\u0131n ve her h\u00e2lde tazminat\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dendi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak on y\u0131l\u0131n ge\u00e7mesiyle zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frar. Tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesi kendisinden istenilen ki\u015fi, durumu birlikte sorumlu oldu\u011fu ki\u015filere bildirmek zorundad\u0131r. Aksi takdirde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, bu bildirimin d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131na g\u00f6re yap\u0131labilece\u011fi tarihte i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>MADDE 82-<\/strong><\/span> Sebepsiz zenginle\u015fmeden do\u011fan istem hakk\u0131, hak sahibinin geri istem hakk\u0131 oldu\u011funu \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak iki y\u0131l\u0131n ve her h\u00e2lde zenginle\u015fmenin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak on y\u0131l\u0131n ge\u00e7mesiyle zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frar. Zenginle\u015fme, zenginle\u015fenin bir alacak hakk\u0131 kazanmas\u0131 suretiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015fse di\u011fer taraf, istem hakk\u0131 zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olsa bile, her zaman bu borcunu ifadan ka\u00e7\u0131nabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 147-<\/span><\/strong> A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki alacaklar i\u00e7in <strong>be\u015f y\u0131ll\u0131k<\/strong> zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 uygulan\u0131r:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">1. Kira bedelleri, anapara faizleri ve \u00fccret gibi di\u011fer d\u00f6nemsel edimler.<br \/>\n2. Otel, motel, pansiyon ve tatil k\u00f6y\u00fc gibi yerlerdeki konaklama bedelleri ile lokanta ve benzeri yerlerdeki yeme i\u00e7me bedelleri.<br \/>\n3. K\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck sanat i\u015flerinden ve k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck \u00e7apta perakende sat\u0131\u015flardan do\u011fan alacaklar.<br \/>\n4. Bir ortakl\u0131kta, ortakl\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden do\u011fan ve ortaklar\u0131n birbirleri veya kendileri ile ortakl\u0131k aras\u0131ndaki; bir ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcd\u00fcrleri, temsilcileri, denet\u00e7ileri ile ortakl\u0131k veya ortaklar aras\u0131ndaki alacaklar.<br \/>\n5. Vek\u00e2let, komisyon ve acental\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinden, ticari simsarl\u0131k \u00fccreti alaca\u011f\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, simsarl\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden do\u011fan alacaklar.<br \/>\n6. Y\u00fcklenicinin y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerini a\u011f\u0131r kusuruyla hi\u00e7 ya da gere\u011fi gibi ifa etmemesi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, eser s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden do\u011fan alacaklar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 148-<\/span><\/strong> Bu ay\u0131r\u0131mda belirlenen zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcreleri, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle de\u011fi\u015ftirilemez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 149-<\/span> <\/strong>Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel olmas\u0131yla i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. Alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel olmas\u0131n\u0131n bir bildirime ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu h\u00e2llerde, zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 bu bildirimin yap\u0131labilece\u011fi g\u00fcnden i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 150-<\/span><\/strong> \u00d6m\u00fcr boyunca gelir ve benzeri d\u00f6nemsel edimlerde, alaca\u011f\u0131n tamam\u0131 i\u00e7in zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, ifa edilmemi\u015f ilk d\u00f6nemsel edimin muaccel oldu\u011fu g\u00fcnde i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. Alaca\u011f\u0131n tamam\u0131 zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015fsa, ifa edilmemi\u015f d\u00f6nemsel edimler de zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 151-<\/span><\/strong> S\u00fcreler hesaplan\u0131rken zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00fcn say\u0131lmaz ve zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 ancak s\u00fcrenin son g\u00fcn\u00fc de hak kullan\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n ge\u00e7ince ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcrelerinin hesaplanmas\u0131nda da, bor\u00e7lar\u0131n ifas\u0131ndaki s\u00fcrelerin hesaplanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmler uygulan\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 152-<\/span><\/strong> As\u0131l alacak zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fray\u0131nca, ona ba\u011fl\u0131 faiz ve di\u011fer alacaklar da zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 153-<\/span> <\/strong>A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki durumlarda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 i\u015flemeye ba\u015flamaz, ba\u015flam\u0131\u015fsa durur:<br \/>\n1. Velayet s\u00fcresince, \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n ana ve babalar\u0131ndan olan alacaklar\u0131 i\u00e7in.<br \/>\n2. Vesayet s\u00fcresince, vesayet alt\u0131nda bulunanlar\u0131n vasiden veya vesayet i\u015flemleri sebebiyle Devletten olan alacaklar\u0131 i\u00e7in.<br \/>\n3. Evlilik devam etti\u011fi s\u00fcrece, e\u015flerin di\u011ferinden olan alacaklar\u0131 i\u00e7in.<br \/>\n4. Hizmet ili\u015fkisi s\u00fcresince, ev hizmetlilerinin onlar\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131ranlardan olan alacaklar\u0131 i\u00e7in.<br \/>\n5. Bor\u00e7lu, alacak \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu s\u00fcrece.<br \/>\n6. Alaca\u011f\u0131, T\u00fcrk mahkemelerinde ileri s\u00fcrme imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece.<br \/>\n7. Alacakl\u0131 ve bor\u00e7lu s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131n ayn\u0131 ki\u015fide birle\u015fmesinde, birle\u015fmenin ileride ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olarak ortadan kalkmas\u0131 durumunda, bu durumun ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131na kadar ge\u00e7ecek s\u00fcrece.<br \/>\nZamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 durduran sebeplerin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00fcn\u00fcn bitiminde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar veya durmadan \u00f6nce ba\u015flam\u0131\u015f olan i\u015flemesini s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fcr.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 154-<\/span><\/strong> A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki durumlarda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 kesilir:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">1. Bor\u00e7lu borcu ikrar etmi\u015fse, \u00f6zellikle faiz \u00f6demi\u015f veya k\u0131smen ifada bulunmu\u015fsa ya da rehin vermi\u015f veya kefil g\u00f6stermi\u015fse.<br \/>\n2. Alacakl\u0131, dava veya def\u2019i yoluyla mahkemeye veya hakeme ba\u015fvurmu\u015fsa, icra takibinde bulunmu\u015fsa ya da iflas masas\u0131na ba\u015fvurmu\u015fsa.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 155-<\/span> <\/strong>Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 m\u00fcteselsil bor\u00e7lulardan veya b\u00f6l\u00fcnemeyen borcun bor\u00e7lular\u0131ndan birine kar\u015f\u0131 kesilince, di\u011ferlerine kar\u015f\u0131 da kesilmi\u015f olur. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 as\u0131l bor\u00e7luya kar\u015f\u0131 kesilince, kefile kar\u015f\u0131 da kesilmi\u015f olur. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 kefile kar\u015f\u0131 kesilince, as\u0131l bor\u00e7luya kar\u015f\u0131 kesilmi\u015f olmaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 156-<\/span> <\/strong>Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n kesilmesiyle, yeni bir s\u00fcre i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. Bor\u00e7 bir senetle ikrar edilmi\u015f veya bir mahkeme ya da hakem karar\u0131na ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f ise, yeni s\u00fcre her zaman on y\u0131ld\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 157-<\/span><\/strong> Bir dava veya def\u2019i yoluyla kesilmi\u015f olan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, dava s\u00fcresince taraflar\u0131n yarg\u0131lamaya ili\u015fkin her i\u015fleminden veya h\u00e2kimin her karar\u0131ndan sonra yeniden i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, icra takibiyle kesilmi\u015fse, alaca\u011f\u0131n takibine ili\u015fkin her i\u015flemden sonra yeniden i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, iflas masas\u0131na ba\u015fvurma sebebiyle kesilmi\u015fse, iflasa ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmlere g\u00f6re alaca\u011f\u0131n yeniden istenmesi imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fumundan itibaren yeniden i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 158-<\/span> <\/strong>Dava veya def\u2019i; mahkemenin yetkili veya g\u00f6revli olmamas\u0131 ya da d\u00fczeltilebilecek bir yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131k yap\u0131lmas\u0131 yahut vaktinden \u00f6nce a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle reddedilmi\u015f olup da o arada zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 veya hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre dolmu\u015fsa, alacakl\u0131 altm\u0131\u015f g\u00fcnl\u00fck ek s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 159-<\/span> <\/strong>Alaca\u011f\u0131n bir ta\u015f\u0131n\u0131r rehniyle g\u00fcvenceye ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, bu alacak i\u00e7in zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flemesine engel olmaz; bununla birlikte alacakl\u0131n\u0131n, hakk\u0131n\u0131 rehinden alma yetkisi devam eder.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 160-<\/span><\/strong> Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nceden feragat edilemez. M\u00fcteselsil bor\u00e7lulardan birinin feragat etmi\u015f olmas\u0131, di\u011ferlerine kar\u015f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez. B\u00f6l\u00fcnemez bir borcun bor\u00e7lular\u0131ndan birinin feragat etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 durumunda da ayn\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcm uygulan\u0131r. As\u0131l bor\u00e7lunun feragati de kefile kar\u015f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">MADDE 161-<\/span> <\/strong>Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmedik\u00e7e, h\u00e2kim bunu kendili\u011finden g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne alamaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>\u0130RADE KAVRAMI VE \u0130RADE SAKATLI\u011eI<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>\u0130rade,<\/strong><\/span> bir \u015feyi yap\u0131p yapmamaya karar verme g\u00fcc\u00fcd\u00fcr. \u0130radenin hukuk d\u00fcnyas\u0131nda ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi olabilmesi i\u00e7in belirli ara\u00e7larla d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya yans\u0131mas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Hukuk, sadece d\u0131\u015fa vurulan irade a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131yla u\u011fra\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Bor\u00e7lar Kanunumuz s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulabilmesi i\u00e7in taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 ve birbirine uygun irade beyanlar\u0131nda bulunmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. \u0130rade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, bir kimsenin bir hakk\u0131 veya hukuki ili\u015fkiyi kurma, de\u011fi\u015ftirme ve ortadan kald\u0131rma iradesini d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya bildirmesidir.<em> (Ayd\u0131n Aybay; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Dersleri, \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi \u0130ktisat Fak\u00fcltesi, \u0130stanbul, 1979, s.12-13.-Rona Serozan; Medeni Hukuk- Genel B\u00f6l\u00fcm, Vedat Kitap\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k, \u0130stanbul,2005, s.253.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131l\u0131rken taraflardan birinin i\u015flem iradesinin olu\u015fum veya beyan\u0131 a\u015famas\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan sakatl\u0131klara <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>irade bozuklu\u011fu<\/strong><\/span> denir <em>(Eren, F.: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 22. b., Ankara 2017, s. 392)<\/em>. \u00a0\u0130rade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2lleri m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nda (BK) \u201cR\u0131zadaki fesat\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131nda \u201cHata\u201d, \u201cHile\u201d ve \u201c\u0130krah\u201d olarak 23 ila 31. maddeler aras\u0131nda h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f iken, 01.07.2012 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun (TBK) 30 ila 39. maddeleri aras\u0131nda bu defa \u201cYan\u0131lma\u201d, \u201cAldatma\u201d ve \u201cKorkutma\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. TBK. M. 26\u2019ya g\u00f6re: \u2018\u2018Taraflar bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fini kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde \u00f6zg\u00fcrce belirleyebilirler\u2019\u2019 denilmi\u015ftir. Yine Anayasam\u0131z\u0131n 48. maddesinde de \u2018\u2018Herkes diledi\u011fi alanda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ve s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne sahiptir\u2019\u2019 denilmi\u015ftir. \u0130rade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hukuki i\u015flemler vas\u0131tas\u0131yla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yap\u0131p yapmamay\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n\u0131 istenilen \u015fekilde se\u00e7meyi, \u015fekil serbestisini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi ortadan kald\u0131rmay\u0131 ve s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fini istenilen \u015fekilde belirlemeyi kanunda belirtilen s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7erisinde kapsamaktad\u0131r.<em> (Cevdet Yavuz; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Dersleri, \u00d6zel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 1. Bas\u0131, Beta Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul,2000, s.4-5.; Derya Ate\u015f, \u2018\u2018S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00d6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden D\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck Kurallar\u0131\u2019\u2019, TBB Dergisi, S.72, 2007, s.75-93.)<\/em> Kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n haricinde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli olarak kurulabilmesi i\u00e7in iradelerin de sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 gerekmektedir, aksi takdirde iradesi fesada u\u011frat\u0131lan taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iptal hakk\u0131 do\u011facakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 11.04.1990 g\u00fcn ve 1990\/1\u2013152, 1990\/236 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, davada dayan\u0131lan maddi olaylar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan birka\u00e7 hukuki nedenin bir arada g\u00f6sterilmesinde ilke olarak usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir y\u00f6n yoktur. Hukuki sebeplerden bir tanesinin di\u011fer hukuki sebebin incelenmesine olanak verir niteli\u011fi bulundu\u011fu s\u00fcrece \u00f6nem ve l\u00fczum derecesine g\u00f6re birden fazla hukuki sebep ayn\u0131 davada inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma konusu yap\u0131labilir. <em>(<\/em><em>T.C. 1.HD Esas: 2017\/2634 Karar: 2020\/2741 Tarih: 17.06.2020)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>1-) H\u0130LE (ALDATMA) : <\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">G<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">enel olarak, bir kimseyi irade beyan\u0131nda bulunmaya, \u00f6zellikle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya sevk etmek i\u00e7in onda kasten hatal\u0131 b<\/span>ir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131rmak veya esasen var olan hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131y\u0131 korumak yahut devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlan\u0131r. Hile, ger\u00e7ek durumu bilmesi halinde bir kimsenin kabul etmeyecek oldu\u011fu bir \u015feyi kabul etmesine di\u011fer bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan yol a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi \u00fczere hatada yan\u0131lma, hilede ise kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak yan\u0131ltma s\u00f6z konusudur. Hilede irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iradenin beyan\u0131nda de\u011fil, iradenin olu\u015fumunda meydana gelmektedir. \u0130radenin olu\u015fumundaki sakatl\u0131k ise ki\u015finin kendisi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka birinin kas\u0131tl\u0131 bir aldatma fiiliyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmektedir. Nitekim, Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda, hilenin; ger\u00e7ek durumu bilmesi h\u00e2linde bir kimsenin kabul etmeyecek oldu\u011fu bir \u015feyi kabul etmesine di\u011fer bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan yol a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bir hukuki i\u015flemin ge\u00e7erli ve amac\u0131na uygun hukuki sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in o hukuki i\u015flemi yapan ki\u015fi veya ki\u015filerin sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde olu\u015fmu\u015f iradelerinin bulunmas\u0131 ve yine bu iradelerinin istenilen hukuki sonuca uygun \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. \u0130rade bozuklu\u011fu kavram\u0131n\u0131n iki farkl\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fc bulunmakta olup, bunlardan ilki iradenin hen\u00fcz olu\u015fum evresindeki sakatl\u0131k, di\u011feri ise iradenin a\u00e7\u0131\u011fa vurulmas\u0131 (beyan\u0131-bildirimi) evresinde meydana gelen sakatl\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130rade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2lleri m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 BK\u2019nda \u201cR\u0131zadaki fesat\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131nda \u201cHata\u201d, \u201cHile\u201d ve \u201c\u0130krah\u201d olarak 23 ila 31. maddeler aras\u0131nda h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f iken, 01.07.2012 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK\u2019n\u0131n 30 ila 39. maddeleri aras\u0131nda bu defa \u201cYan\u0131lma\u201d, \u201cAldatma\u201d ve \u201cKorkutma\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>Aldatmay\u0131 (hileyi) ispat y\u00fck\u00fc<\/strong><\/span>, aldat\u0131lan tarafa aittir. Hata, hile ve ikrah iddialar\u0131n\u0131n senede ba\u011flanmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan senetle ispat edilmesinde maddi imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131k vard\u0131r. Bu nedenle hukuki i\u015flemlerdeki irade bozuklu\u011fu iddialar\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) 203\/1-\u00e7 maddesinde senede kar\u015f\u0131 senetle ispat zorunlulu\u011funun istisnalar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme resm\u00ee senetle yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) \u201cResm\u00ee belgelerle ispat\u201d kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 7. maddesi \u201cResm\u00ee sicil ve senetler, belgeledikleri olgular\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funa kan\u0131t olu\u015fturur. Bunlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131, kanunlarda ba\u015fka bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, her hangi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, hile olgusunun tan\u0131k d\u00e2hil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Salt s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi okumam\u0131\u015f olmak, hile olarak kabul edilmez. Hile olarak kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi okumamas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek makul ve ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f etkilerin olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda basit yalan hile olarak de\u011ferlendirilmezken, <strong><em>hukuk yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda basit yalan olay\u0131n somut \u00f6zelliklerine g\u00f6re bazen hile te\u015fkil edebilmektedir<\/em><\/strong>. Ancak aldat\u0131lan\u0131n bu basit yalana inanmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek makul ve somut olgular\u0131n ortaya konulmas\u0131 gerekir. <strong>Hukuk muhakemesindeki hile kavram\u0131, ceza hukukundaki hile kavram\u0131ndan daha geni\u015ftir.<\/strong> <strong>Hukuk yarg\u0131lamas\u0131ndaki her hileli i\u015flem, ceza hukukundaki doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturmayabilir.<\/strong> <strong>\u00d6ne s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcp iddia edilen hilenin inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 olmas\u0131 yan\u0131nda, hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na da (tecr\u00fcbe kurallar\u0131na) uygun olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/strong> <strong>Hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n teknik delillerle <\/strong><em>(Bilirki\u015fi raporu vs.)<\/em><strong> de \u00e7eli\u015fmemesi gerekir.<\/strong> Y\u00fcksek mahkeme, hi\u00e7 bir makul neden ve gerek\u00e7e yokken, malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck k\u0131sm\u0131na y\u00f6nelik yap\u0131lan devirlerde, hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygunluk g\u00f6rmemektedir. Yine <strong>semenin (bedelin) s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin asli unsurlar\u0131ndan oldu\u011funu, i\u015flemden hemen sonra \u00f6denece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinin yarat\u0131l\u0131p bedelin \u00f6denmemesini hile kabul etmekte, iradenin sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmektedir. Ancak semenin i\u015flemden bir k\u0131s\u0131m zaman sonra \u00f6denece\u011finin taraflarca kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde sadece bedelin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n yasal di\u011fer takip yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi olabilece\u011fini; tapu iptal ve tescile sebebiyet veremeyece\u011fini kabul etmektedir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Bedelin \u00f6denip \u00f6denmemesi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda; resmi akitteki bedelin farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131n ancak ayn\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7teki ba\u015fka bir delille kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bor\u00e7lar Hukukunda, hile olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan bu durum ceza hukukunda, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. TCK madde 157\u2019ye g\u00f6re doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7u, hileli davran\u0131\u015flarla bir kimseyi aldat\u0131p, onun veya ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131na olarak, kendisine veya bir ba\u015fkas\u0131na yarar sa\u011flamas\u0131 durumudur. Doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unun olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in fiilin, hileli davran\u0131\u015flar sonucu bir kimseyi aldatmas\u0131, onun veya ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131na olarak, kendisine veya ba\u015fkas\u0131na bir yarar sa\u011flamas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Hile, nitelikli bir yaland\u0131r. <strong><em>Yalan belli oranda a\u011f\u0131r, yo\u011fun ve ustaca olma, sergileni\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ma\u011fdurun denetleme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/em><\/strong> Kullan\u0131lan hile ile ma\u011fdur yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmeli ve bu yan\u0131ltma sonucu kand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flarla yalanlara inanan ma\u011fdur taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131k veya bir ba\u015fkas\u0131na haks\u0131z \u00e7\u0131kar sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Hilenin kand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 somut olarak de\u011ferlendirilmeli, olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi, ma\u011fdurun durumu, fiille olan ili\u015fkisi, kullan\u0131lan hilenin \u015fekli, kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa gizlenen veya de\u011fi\u015ftirilen belgenin nitelikleri ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 nazara al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. O halde hileli davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n aldatacak nitelikte olmas\u0131 gerekir. Basit bir yalan hileli hareket olarak kabul edilemez. Ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen her hile eylemi doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturmazken, her doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k eylemi, hile unsurunu i\u00e7erisinde bar\u0131nd\u0131rmaktad\u0131r. Hile, bir \u015fah\u0131sta yanl\u0131\u015f fikir ve kanaat meydana getirmek veya mevcut bir yanl\u0131\u015f fikrin devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lan her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hareket ve s\u00f6ylenen s\u00f6zlerdir. Hile, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir kimsenin hukuki i\u015flem yapmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in onu kasten yan\u0131ltma durumudur. Hile halinde, bir kimse, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in s\u00f6zleri veya davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 ile onda yanl\u0131\u015f bir kanaat uyand\u0131rmakta veya kar\u015f\u0131 tarafta olan yanl\u0131\u015f kanaati g\u00fc\u00e7lendirerek, bu kanaatin devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamaktad\u0131r. Yani hile, fiili olarak kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa yanl\u0131\u015f beyanlarda bulunarak aldatmak \u015feklinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilece\u011fi gibi s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce a\u00e7\u0131klama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken konularda sessiz kalmak suretiyle de ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilmektedir. <em>(Bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 11.CD. T. 05.06.2006, E.2005\/144, K.2006\/5115. &#8211; 5 YHGK. T. 03.04.1963, 1963\/ 4-76-40 s. karar\u0131nda da \u2018\u2018hile, ger\u00e7ek durumu bilmesi halinde bir kimsenin kabul etmeyecek oldu\u011fu bir \u015feyi kabul etmesine di\u011fer bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan yol a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r\u2019\u2019 denmektedir.-Nevzat Toroslu; Ceza Hukuku \u00d6zel K\u0131s\u0131m, Sava\u015f Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Ankara, 2008, s.173.) <\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Her doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k bir aldatma-hile kabul edilebilirse de her aldatma-hile bir doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k say\u0131lmayabilir. Ceza kanunundaki doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n kapsam\u0131 daha dar hilenin kapsam\u0131 ise daha geni\u015ftir.<strong><em> (D\u00f6nmezer Sulhi, Ceza Hukuku Hususi K\u0131s\u0131m \u015eah\u0131slara Kar\u015f\u0131 Mal Aleyhine C\u00fcr\u00fcmler,2. Bas\u0131 1953 sh.207 vd.-Yan\u0131lma-Aldatma-Korkutma Davalar\u0131, Eraslan \u00d6zkaya sh.196) \u00d6rne\u011fin tapuya kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi akdetmek amac\u0131yla kand\u0131r\u0131larak g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddias\u0131 ceza muhakemesine g\u00f6re <\/em><\/strong><em>(<\/em><em>T.C. YARGITAY ONBE\u015e\u0130NC\u0130 CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2017\/27851 Karar : 2019\/11480 Tarih : 12.11.2019 sy karar\u0131)<\/em> hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil edip, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturmasa da, hukuk yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda bu iddia, hile olgusu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Kar\u015f\u0131 taraf aldatmak kast\u0131yla s\u00f6ylenmeyen s\u00f6zleri, tak\u0131n\u0131lan tavr\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131 taraf ciddiye alarak yan\u0131lsa dahi kas\u0131t bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan aldatman\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemez. Burada ancak ko\u015fullar\u0131 varsa esasl\u0131 hata nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali istenebilir. Aldatma kast\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 zararland\u0131rma ve k\u00f6t\u00fc olma vasf\u0131 aranmaz. \u0130hmal ve dikkatsizlik ile kar\u015f\u0131 taraf yan\u0131lt\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa, kas\u0131t olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan aldatmadan s\u00f6z edilemez. T\u00fcm bu anlat\u0131mlardan kas\u0131t unsurunun te\u015fekk\u00fcl edebilmesi i\u00e7in;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aldatan kimsenin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafta do\u011fumuna sebebiyet verdi\u011fi fikrin yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu bilmesi veya o fikrin do\u011fru oldu\u011funu kendisi dahi bilmedi\u011fi halde kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa biliyormu\u015f gibi g\u00f6stermesi,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aldatan ki\u015finin yanl\u0131\u015f beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n do\u011fru kabul edip, bunlara g\u00f6re karar verece\u011fine inanmas\u0131,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aldatman\u0131n aldatan ki\u015finin istedi\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n yapmas\u0131 i\u00e7in tahrik ve te\u015fvik etmeye y\u00f6nelik bulunmas\u0131 gibi \u00fc\u00e7 ko\u015fuldan birinin bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. <strong><em>(Yan\u0131lma-Aldatma-Korkutma Davalar\u0131, Eraslan \u00d6zkaya sh.203-204)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>H\u0130LE \u0130DD\u0130ASININ HAYATIN OLA\u011eAN AKI\u015eINA (Tecr\u00fcbe Kurallar\u0131na) UYGUNLU\u011eU : <\/strong><\/span>Hukuk muhakemesinde, <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>basit bir ara\u015ft\u0131rmayla tespit edilebilecek olgu ve eylemler<\/strong><\/span> hile olarak nitelendirilmez. (&#8221;<em>&#8230;.Temlikin iradi oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan her ne kadar devir tarihinde ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n de\u011ferli oldu\u011fu, ancak kendisinin bu i\u015flemleri e\u015finden gizleyerek yapmas\u0131n\u0131 daval\u0131lar\u0131n istedi\u011fi ve aldat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de, davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n konum ve niteli\u011fi konusunda <strong>basit bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ile bilgi sahibi olabilece\u011fi,<\/strong> daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015finin de devirden haberi oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015ftan beri i\u015flemi bildi\u011fi<\/em>&#8230;.<strong>Yarg.1.HD. Esas: 2021\/7824, Karar: 2022\/2313-Konya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 12\/07\/2021 tarihli 2021\/877 Esas 2021\/965 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131<\/strong>) \u00d6rne\u011fin kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 akdedilen protokol\u00fcn bir \u00f6rne\u011fi i\u015flem s\u0131ras\u0131nda kendisine teslim edilen \u015fah\u0131s, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusunda hataya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddias\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrer ve i\u015flem tarihinden uzunca bir zaman sonra dava yoluna giderse, bu iddias\u0131 inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmez. <strong>Resmi dairelerde i\u015flem yap\u0131lmazdan \u00f6nce veya yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra, taraflar aras\u0131nda i\u015fleme dair yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme ve protokoller, ayn\u0131 zamanda icazet ve iradi olarak i\u015flem tesis edildi\u011fi anlam\u0131n\u0131 da ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Yine <strong>s\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulup tamamland\u0131ktan sonra, vuku bulan eylemler<\/strong> hile olarak kabul edilmez, i\u015flemin s\u0131hhatine etki etmez. \u00d6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen hilenin; hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmas\u0131 gerekir. Tecr\u00fcbe kurallar\u0131 gere\u011fince hakim, aldat\u0131lan\u0131n ekonomik ve e\u011fitim durumunu, ya\u015f\u0131n\u0131, engellilik (sa\u011fl\u0131k) durumunu, resmi dairelerde s\u00fcrekli yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flerini bu tespitte g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurur. <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">\u00d6rne\u011fin \u00e7ok say\u0131da ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 bulunan ve s\u0131kl\u0131kla tapu dairesinde i\u015flem yapan, benzer \u015fekilde ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 y\u0131llard\u0131r kiraya veren ki\u015finin, <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">tapu dairesine kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 inanc\u0131yla g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddias\u0131<\/span>n\u0131 ortaya atmas\u0131, hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na <em>(Tecr\u00fcbe kurallar\u0131na)<\/em> ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. Zira tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde kira akti d\u00fczenlenmesi yasal olarak m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir, ancak \u00f6ncesinde taraflarca haz\u0131rlanarak notere onaylat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin tapu siciline \u015eerh olarak i\u015fletilmesi s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. Benzer \u015fekilde 3.ki\u015fi lehine bedelsiz kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlenebilmesi yasal olarak m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. 193 numaral\u0131 Gelir Vergisi Kanunu\u2019nun 73.maddesine g\u00f6re vergi beyan\u0131 edilmesini gerektirmeyen ve bedelsiz olarak ge\u00e7en kiralama; yaln\u0131zca \u00e7ocuk, torun, anne, baba, nine, dede ve karde\u015flere yap\u0131labilmektedir. Kanunda belirtilmi\u015f olan bu yak\u0131nlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tan\u0131d\u0131k veya farkl\u0131 akrabalara bedelsiz kiralama yap\u0131lamamaktad\u0131r.<\/span> \u00a0\u00d6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen hilenin inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 <\/strong><em>(akla yatk\u0131n)<\/em><strong> da olmas\u0131 gerekir. Ortaya konan olgu ve olaylar\u0131n, hata-hile-korkutma-gabin-inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem t\u00fcrlerinden hangisini olu\u015fturdu\u011funu belirleyerek h\u00fck\u00fcm kurma yetkisi hakime aittir. \u00d6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma vaadiyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin akdedilmesi sonras\u0131nda edimin yerine getirilmemesi, hileyi olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #993300;\">Salt akdedilen s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi okumam\u0131\u015f olmak, hile te\u015fkil etmez, okumamaya y\u00f6nelik d\u0131\u015f bir etkinin\/davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n ortaya konulmas\u0131 gerekir<\/span>. Y\u00fcksek mahkeme, daval\u0131 veya 3.ki\u015fiyle olan yak\u0131nl\u0131k ili\u015fkisi ve duyulan g\u00fcven\u00a0 nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin okunmadan imza edilmesi halini ola\u011fan kabul etmektedir. Ancak bu halde de taraflar\u0131n ki\u015filik \u00f6zellikleri, e\u011fitim durumu, ya\u015f ve engellilik hali, aldat\u0131lan\u0131n resmi dairelerde s\u0131kl\u0131kla yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemler, i\u015fleme s\u00fcr\u00fckleyen ki\u015filere olan g\u00fcvenin nedenleri ve i\u015flemin hukuki niteli\u011fi gibi k\u0131staslar hakim taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulacakt\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi okumadan imza etmesini gerektirecek somut olgu, davran\u0131\u015f ve olaylar ortaya konulacakt\u0131r. Yine sadece bedelin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 da ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na hile olgusunu ispata elveri\u015fli de\u011fildir. Salt duyuma dayal\u0131 veya s\u00f6ylentileri aktaran veya i\u015flemin nas\u0131l ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fine dair davac\u0131 asilden duyduklar\u0131n\u0131 aktaran tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 ile hile iddias\u0131 ispat edilemez. 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre, mahkemece resen g\u00f6zetilir. Taraflar\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcp s\u00fcrmemesine bak\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n, mahkemece resen ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve soru\u015fturma cihetine gidilir.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;..Davac\u0131 ile o\u011flu daval\u0131 aras\u0131nda 01\/06\/2015 tarihinde \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi imzalanarak, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bedeli mukabilinde daval\u0131ya devrinin kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ancak devir i\u015fleminin 20\/07\/2016 tarihinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi ve dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sadece \u00e7\u0131plak m\u00fclkiyetinin devredildi\u011fi, yap\u0131lan incelemede <strong>s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile devir tarihi aras\u0131nda 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k uzun bir s\u00fcrenin bulundu\u011fu, bu bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre zarf\u0131nda hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ya da hile yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu&#8230;.<\/strong>&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD. Esas : 2022\/8056 Karar : 2023\/573 Tarih : 31.01.2023)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y A R G I T A Y<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>7 . H U K U K D A \u0130 R E S \u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas No : 2024\/922<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar No : 2024\/5785<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n okur-yazar oldu\u011fu gerek davac\u0131n\u0131n isticvab\u0131 sonucunda kendi beyanlar\u0131ndan, gerek dava a\u00e7arken avukat\u0131na vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu vekaletnamesini bizzat imzalam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131ndan, gerek dosya i\u00e7erisinde bulunan ve dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u015fah\u0131slara vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu vekaletnamelerden, gerekse e\u011fitim durumunun tespiti i\u00e7in Milli E\u011fitim M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yaz\u0131lan m\u00fczekkereden anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup Tapu Sicil M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki 03.07.2019 tarihli resmi i\u015flemin hile ile yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc, <strong>okuma-yazma bilen bir ki\u015finin, resmi \u015fekle uyularak yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bir i\u015flemin intifa hakk\u0131 tesisi de\u011fil de kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 inanc\u0131yla yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil etmektedir<\/strong>. De\u011finilen y\u00f6nler g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilerek davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu nedenlerle bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> T.C. <\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY <\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2020\/128<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2022\/1415<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 02.11.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Hatada yan\u0131lma, hilede ise kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak yan\u0131ltma s\u00f6z konusudur. Hilede irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iradenin beyan\u0131nda de\u011fil, iradenin olu\u015fumunda meydana gelmektedir. \u0130radenin olu\u015fumundaki sakatl\u0131k ise ki\u015finin kendisi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka birinin <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>kas\u0131tl\u0131 bir aldatma fiili<\/strong><\/span>yle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmektedir. Nitekim, Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda, hilenin; <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">ger\u00e7ek durumu bilmesi h\u00e2linde bir kimsenin kabul etmeyecek oldu\u011fu bir \u015feyi<\/span> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">kabul etmesi<\/span><\/strong>ne di\u011fer bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan yol a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ihtiya\u00e7 vard\u0131r: Birinci \u015fart \u201caldatma fiili\u201ddir. Aldatan \u015fah\u0131s di\u011ferini yan\u0131ltm\u0131\u015f (hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f) olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Fakat kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bu yan\u0131lman\u0131n esasl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmez (TBK. m.36\/1). \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc aldatan hi\u00e7bir surette korunmaya lay\u0131k de\u011fildir. Aldatan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda, belirli konu ve hususlarda do\u011fru olmayan bilgiler vermekte veya baz\u0131 hususlar\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 gerekirken kasten gizlemektedir. \u0130kinci \u015fart; \u201caldatma kast\u0131\u201dd\u0131r. Aldatan, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya ikna etmek i\u00e7in ona bilerek ve isteyerek (kasten) ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, yalan s\u00f6yleyende kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 aldatmak ve onun ger\u00e7e\u011fi bilmesi h\u00e2linde yapmayacak oldu\u011fu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapma\u011fa sevk etmek niyeti bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">E\u011fer bir kimse, bilmemesi a\u011f\u0131r bir kusur te\u015fkil etmesine ra\u011fmen, durumu bilmeden bir<\/span> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">beyanda bulunmu\u015f ise aldatma kast\u0131 yoktur<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">.<\/span> \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fart ise \u201cilliyet ba\u011f\u0131\u201dd\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme aldatma sonucu, onun etkisi ile yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi, aldatma olmas\u0131yd\u0131 ya hi\u00e7 yapmayacak ya da daha iyi \u015fartlarda yapacak idiyse, illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur. Aldatma fiili, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n asli \u015fart\u0131 olmal\u0131, aldatma ile s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda tabi bir illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r <em>(Fikret Eren: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, s. 414 vd., HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/em>Yukar\u0131daki genel a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kapsam\u0131nda somut olay ele al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; davac\u0131 taraf tapuda 27.08.2003, 26.04.2011 ve 16.08.2011 tarihlerinde \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 resm\u00ee i\u015flemle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen t\u00fcm bu temliklerin aldatma (hile) ile sakat oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek, daval\u0131lar ad\u0131na yap\u0131lan tescillerin iptalini talep etmi\u015f ise de dava dilek\u00e7esinde 27.08.2003 tarihinde yap\u0131lan ilk sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin ne \u015fekilde hile ile fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda herhangi bir vak\u0131a ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. <strong>Davac\u0131n\u0131n ya\u015f\u0131n\u0131n verdi\u011fi acziyet nedeniyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri anlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de davac\u0131 bu sat\u0131\u015f i\u015fleminin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte 69 ya\u015f\u0131nda olup, <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">i\u015flem yapmak \u00fczere tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne gitti\u011fini anlayacak durumda olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde<\/span> bir iddia bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Kald\u0131 ki, sat\u0131\u015fa ili\u015fkin resm\u00ee senedin d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi tarihte y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan m\u00fclga Tapu Sicili T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 16. maddesine g\u00f6re (Y\u00f6netmelik Md.18-19-20-24-25) akdi gerektiren i\u015flemlerde resm\u00ee senet d\u00fczenlenir. D\u00fczenlenen resm\u00ee senet memur taraf\u0131ndan m\u00fcd\u00fcr ve taraflar\u0131n huzurunda okunur. Taraflar isterlerse resm\u00ee senedi kendileri de al\u0131p okuyabilirler. Resm\u00ee senede taraflar\u0131n foto\u011fraflar\u0131 yap\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. Taraflar resm\u00ee senetteki imza yerine \u201cokudum\u201d ibaresini yazd\u0131ktan sonra, hem imza yerlerini ve hem de kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 birbirlerinin foto\u011fraf\u0131 \u00fczerini imzalarlar. Davac\u0131 da kendi huzurunda okunan resm\u00ee senedi \u201cokudum\u201d ibaresini yazmak suretiyle ilgili yerlerini imzalam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Resm\u00ee senette yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu da a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a yazmaktad\u0131r. Yine, T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn 101. maddesine g\u00f6re (Yeni T\u00fcz\u00fck md.85) tapu dairesinde akitli veya akitsiz i\u015flemlerle ilgili olarak d\u00fczenlenen tapu senedi veya ipotek belgelerinin birer \u00f6rne\u011fi, m\u00fcd\u00fcr taraf\u0131ndan hak sahiplerine verilir. Bu nedenle <strong>resm\u00ee senet i\u00e7eri\u011fi kendi huzurunda okunmu\u015f olan davac\u0131n\u0131n,<\/strong> 2011 y\u0131l\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemlerinden sonra 2003 y\u0131l\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ilk temlik bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da iradesinin hile ile sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesi, dava dilek\u00e7esinde o tarihteki herhangi bir vak\u0131aya da dayan\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131nda <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131<\/span> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">bulunmam\u0131\u015f<\/span><\/strong> ve iddian\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n 2011 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemlerinin ise hilenin etkisi ile ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini kabul etmek i\u00e7in dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 yeterli de\u011fildir. Keza, <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>resm\u00ee memur \u00f6n\u00fcnde yukar\u0131da niteli\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanan \u015fekilde yap\u0131lan i\u015flemler bulunmakta olup<\/strong>,<\/span> sadece <strong>davac\u0131n\u0131n ya\u015f\u0131 gere\u011fi kand\u0131r\u0131lmaya m\u00fcsait oldu\u011fu olgu&#8230; dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/strong> Ancak hem davac\u0131 hem de daval\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndan davac\u0131 babaannenin <strong>yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemlerin mahiyetini anlayabilecek durumda oldu\u011fu,<\/strong> daval\u0131 torunlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok sevdi\u011fi ve onlara d\u00fc\u015fk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu, \u00f6zellikle ba\u015fka iki dairesini satarak sermaye yap\u0131p i\u015f kurmas\u0131 i\u00e7in paras\u0131n\u0131 o\u011fluna veren ancak kurdu\u011fu i\u015fi y\u00fcr\u00fctemeyen o\u011flu nedeniyle torunlar\u0131na bir mal kalmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnen davac\u0131n\u0131n temlikleri iradi olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Kald\u0131 ki, 26.04.2011 tarihinde daval\u0131lardan &#8230;\u2019e yap\u0131lan pay sat\u0131\u015f\u0131ndan \u00f6nce davac\u0131n\u0131n banka hesab\u0131na 25.04.2011 tarihinde \u201cev yar\u0131 hisse bedeli\u201d a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 ile ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan 60.000TL para yat\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. D\u00fczenlenen bilirki\u015fi raporuna g\u00f6re tapuda g\u00f6sterilen sat\u0131\u015f bedelleri ile daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yat\u0131r\u0131lan 60.000TL bedel ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ger\u00e7ek de\u011ferinin alt\u0131nda ise de <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>s\u0131rf bedelin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 hilenin kan\u0131t\u0131 olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi<\/strong><\/span> gibi taraflar\u0131n babaanne-torun olduklar\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde temlikte d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bedel g\u00f6sterilmesi de <strong>hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131<\/strong>na uygundur. Aksine, tapuda uzun s\u00fcreye yay\u0131lan \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 i\u015flemle yap\u0131lan devirlerin her \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcn\u00fcn de hilenin etkisiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini kabul etmek <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131<\/strong><\/span>na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca kentsel d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n y\u0131k\u0131l\u0131p yerine yenisinin yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin giri\u015fimlerin de daval\u0131lara yap\u0131lan temliklerden sonra ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. T\u00fcm bu nedenlerle Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan somut olayda hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221;<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">3. Ki\u015finin Aldatmas\u0131 (Hilesi) :<\/span> Aldatan ki\u015fi taraflar\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan 3.ki\u015fi olmay\u0131p, aldatmadan yararlanan temsilcisi ise bu aldatma taraf aldatmas\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/strong> Bir taraf\u0131n temsilcisini 3.ki\u015fi aldatm\u0131\u015fsa aldatan taraf aldatma nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iptal ettirebilir. Ancak yararlanan taraf\u0131n <span style=\"color: #800080;\"><strong>bu aldatmay\u0131 bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/strong><\/span> Tan\u0131t\u0131m ve reklamda aldatma kast\u0131 de\u011fil, bilgilendirme, tan\u0131tma, duyurma kast\u0131 vard\u0131r. Bu nedenle bu t\u00fcr durumlarda hilenin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi kabul edilmez. Benzer \u015fekilde <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu kararlar\u0131na g\u00f6re, <span style=\"color: #000000;\">s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulma, m\u00fczakere ve haz\u0131rl\u0131k a\u015famalar\u0131ndan birisine kat\u0131lan ki\u015fi,<\/span> 3.ki\u015fi olarak kabul edilmez; bu ki\u015finin hilesi taraf hilesi olarak kabul edilir. Ancak Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi g\u00fcncel kararlar\u0131na g\u00f6re ise, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin haz\u0131rl\u0131k, kurulma ve m\u00fczakere a\u015famalar\u0131ndan birine kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi 3.ki\u015fi hilesinin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine etki edebilmesi i\u00e7in, daval\u0131 yan\u0131n bu hileyi bildi\u011fine veya bilebilecek durumda oldu\u011funa dair <span style=\"color: #800080;\">SOMUT DEL\u0130L<\/span> aranmaktad\u0131r.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aldatma eylemi pasif eylem ile yap\u0131lmas\u0131 da m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Bu durumda kar\u015f\u0131 taraf bilgi vermesi gereken bir durumda bundan ka\u00e7\u0131nma veya susma \u015feklinde bunu ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirebilir. <strong>Susma yolu ile aldatman\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi i\u00e7in kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n yan\u0131lan taraf\u0131, i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu yan\u0131lg\u0131lar hakk\u0131nda ayd\u0131nlatma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn olmas\u0131 gerekir<\/strong>. Kar\u015f\u0131 taraf d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n, temel noktada yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc anlamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen onu yan\u0131lg\u0131s\u0131 konusunda uyarmamas\u0131 da pasif eylem neticesinde aldatma olarak addedilir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>Akdin taraflar\u0131ndan birisinin irade serbest\u00eesi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan sakatlanm\u0131\u015f bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme, icazetle veya fesih i\u00e7in kabul edilmi\u015f olan s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesiyle ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 hale gelir. Buna g\u00f6re, akdin ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 hale gelmesi iki<\/em><br \/>\n<em>halde m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr:<\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u0130cazet :<\/strong><\/span> Yenlik do\u011furan bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130cazet, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 kalmay\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshinden vazge\u00e7meyi ifade eden bir irade beyan\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130cazet vermekle yeni bir i\u015flem do\u011fmaz ve fakat hata, hile veya ikrah ile malul olan sakat bir i\u015flem s\u0131hhat kazanm\u0131\u015f,<em><strong> ge\u00e7erli hale gelmi\u015f olur. <\/strong><\/em>\u0130cazetin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in bunun, iradesi hata, hile veya korkutma ile zedelenmi\u015f olan kimse taraf\u0131ndan verilmesi gerekir. \u0130rade fesatl\u0131\u011f\u0131na maruz kalan kimse, akde icazet verirse, akit ba\u015ftan ge\u00e7erli hale gelir. <strong><em>\u0130cazet, a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fu gibi z\u0131mn\u00ee de olabilir<\/em><\/strong>. Mesela a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a icazet verdi\u011fini s\u00f6ylemesi, a\u00e7\u0131k icazet, di\u011fer taraf\u0131n ifas\u0131n\u0131n kabul etmesi veya al\u0131nan \u015feyleri kullanmas\u0131 z\u0131mn\u00ee icazet anlam\u0131na gelir. TBK md.39 gere\u011fince bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcrede bu yap\u0131labilinir. Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin tespitinde, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye z\u0131mnen icazet verilip verilmedi\u011fine dair olgular da g\u00f6zetilir. \u0130cazet verilmesi s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin makabline \u015famil olarak h\u00fck\u00fcm do\u011furmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flar. (<em>Turan \u00c7\u0131nar, Tapu \u0130ptali ve Tescili Davalar\u0131, sy. 529)-(Arpac\u0131, Abd\u00fclkadir, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel B\u00f6l\u00fcm Birinci Cilt, \u0130stanbul 2008, s.243)<\/em><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcrenin kullan\u0131lmadan ge\u00e7irilmesi: <\/strong><\/span>S\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan taraf BK, md. 31;de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen irade bozuklu\u011funu, <strong><em>\u00f6\u011frenmeden itibaren ba\u015flayacak<\/em><\/strong> <em>(\u0131tt\u0131la tarihinden)<\/em> bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi feshetmezse, icazet verilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu halde s\u00f6zle\u015fme <strong>yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren ge\u00e7erli olur<\/strong> ve iki taraf\u0131 da ba\u011flar. Bu bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre, hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir s\u00fcredir. Bu bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre ge\u00e7irilirse, netice kesindir. H\u00e2kim, s\u00fcreyi resen dikkate al\u0131r ve taraflar\u0131n talebi olmasa da resen ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131r, soru\u015fturur. <em>(Sevindik Ersin, \u201c\u0130krah\u201d, Yay\u0131mlanmam\u0131\u015f Y\u00fcksek Lisans Tezi, \u0130stanbul 2008.)<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>Hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ihtiya\u00e7 vard\u0131r:<\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Birinci \u015fart \u201caldatma fiili\u201ddir<\/strong>. Aldatan \u015fah\u0131s di\u011ferini yan\u0131ltm\u0131\u015f (hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f) olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Fakat kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bu yan\u0131lman\u0131n esasl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmez (TBK. m.36\/1). \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc aldatan hi\u00e7bir surette korunmaya lay\u0131k de\u011fildir. Aldatan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda, belirli konu ve hususlarda do\u011fru olmayan bilgiler vermekte veya baz\u0131 hususlar\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 gerekirken kasten gizlemektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u0130kinci \u015fart; \u201caldatma kast\u0131\u201dd\u0131r<\/strong>. Aldatan, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya ikna etmek i\u00e7in ona bilerek ve isteyerek (kasten) ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, yalan s\u00f6yleyende kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 aldatmak ve onun ger\u00e7e\u011fi bilmesi h\u00e2linde yapmayacak oldu\u011fu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapma\u011fa sevk etmek niyeti bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer bir kimse, bilmemesi a\u011f\u0131r bir kusur te\u015fkil etmesine ra\u011fmen, durumu bilmeden bir beyanda bulunmu\u015f ise aldatma kast\u0131 yoktur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fart ise \u201cilliyet ba\u011f\u0131\u201dd\u0131r.<\/strong>\u00a0S\u00f6zle\u015fme aldatma sonucu, onun etkisi ile yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi, aldatma olmas\u0131yd\u0131 ya hi\u00e7 yapmayacak ya da daha iyi \u015fartlarda yapacak idiyse, illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur. Aldatma fiili, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n asli \u015fart\u0131 olmal\u0131, aldatma ile s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda tabi bir illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r <em>(Eren, F.: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, s. 414 vd., HGK\u2019n\u0131n 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli olarak kurulabilmesi, taraflar\u0131n birbirleriyle uyu\u015farak verdikleri irade beyan\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. <\/span><\/span>Aldatma fiili kasten i\u015flenmelidir, ihmali hareket yeterli de\u011fildir. Hile eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren kimse yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015feyin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmeli ve kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 kand\u0131rma kast\u0131yla hareket etmelidir. Bir eylemin kas\u0131tl\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131, isteyerek veya maksatl\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lmas\u0131 demektir. Kas\u0131t olmadan, yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131kla veya ihmal ile s\u00f6ylenen s\u00f6z veya davran\u0131\u015flar, fiilin hileyi olu\u015fturmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir. Kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 aldatmak kast\u0131yla s\u00f6ylenmeyen s\u00f6zler veya davran\u0131\u015flar sonucunda kar\u015f\u0131 taraf tak\u0131n\u0131lan tavr\u0131 ciddiye alarak yan\u0131lsa da somut olayda hileden bahsedilemez. \u0130radesi fesada u\u011frayan taraf ancak ko\u015fullar\u0131 mevcutsa esasl\u0131 hata nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali yoluna gidebilir. <em>(Yavuz; a.g.e., s.24. ; Murat Ispartal\u0131; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 1. Bask\u0131, \u0130kinci Sayfa Yay\u0131nevi, \u0130stanbul,2013, s.145. ; Bkz. YARG 1. HD. T. 01.03.2017, E. 2014\/19465, K. 2017\/986. s. karar\u0131nda: \u2018\u2018&#8230;&#8230;. Hile, genel olarak bir kimseyi irade beyan\u0131nda bulunmaya, \u00f6zellikle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya sevk etmek i\u00e7in onda kasten hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131rmak veya esasen var olan hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131y\u0131 koruma yahut devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flama \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. &#8230;..\u2019\u2019- Ali Bozer; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 2. Bask\u0131, Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Enstit\u00fcs\u00fc, Ankara, 2007, s.69.) <\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aldatan, yanl\u0131\u015f beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n veya davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u00e7a do\u011fru kabul edilip, bu y\u00f6nlendirmeye g\u00f6re karar verece\u011fine inanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Hile, di\u011fer taraf\u0131 istenilen hukuki i\u015flemi yapmaya tahrik ve te\u015fvik etmek amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. <em>(Ali Naim \u0130nan ve \u00d6zge Y\u00fccel. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler. 4. Bask\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2014, s. 327 ; \u00d6zkaya; a.g.e., s.190.)<\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ehliyetsizlik, sahtecilik iddias\u0131 <em>(resmi senetteki imza ve yaz\u0131lar\u0131n inkar\u0131)<\/em> ve hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre itiraz\u0131nda bulunulmas\u0131 halinde, hile iddias\u0131ndan \u00f6nce bu hususlar\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131, mevcut olmad\u0131klar\u0131 kanaatine var\u0131lmas\u0131 sonras\u0131nda\u00a0 hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n irdelenmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130lliyet ba\u011f\u0131, ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan zarar ile fiil aras\u0131nda ili\u015fkinin bulunmas\u0131 durumudur. Yap\u0131lan hukuki i\u015flem ile ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen eylem aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmazsa hile olu\u015fmaz . Yani sebep sonu\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi bulunmadan hileden bahsedilemez. Hileye maruz kalan kimse, aldatma fiili olmadan da mevcut hukuki i\u015flemi ayn\u0131 \u015fartlar alt\u0131nda yapacak idiyse illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, hileden s\u00f6z edilemez. Hile eylemi, aldatma kast\u0131 ve illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n birlikte bulundu\u011fu durumlarda s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olacakt\u0131r. Ancak iyi niyet kurallar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin devam\u0131 halinden daha a\u011f\u0131r sonu\u00e7lar meydana getiriyorsa hakim, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli olarak kuruldu\u011funun kabul\u00fcne ve zarar g\u00f6ren taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131lacak olmasayd\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmayacak oldu\u011fu zarar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmedebilir.<em> (\u00d6nen; a.g.e., s.62.- \u00a0\u0130brahim Kaplan; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Dersleri Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 3. Bask\u0131, \u0130maj Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2003, s.101.-Reiso\u011flu; a.g.e. s.125. ; \u015eahin Ak\u0131nc\u0131; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Bilgisi Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 3. Bask\u0131, Sayram Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Konya, 2006, s.112; O\u011fuzman ve \u00d6z; a.g.e., s.113. ; \u00d6zkaya; a.g.e., s.191.- Reiso\u011flu; a.g.e., s.126.- Bkz. YHGK. T. 25.03.2015, E. 2013\/19-1707, K. 2015\/1072.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130lliyet ba\u011f\u0131, bazen s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin belirli bir k\u0131sm\u0131na ili\u015fkin olabilir. Bu durumda TBK 27\/2 kapsam\u0131nda k\u0131smi iptal s\u00f6z konusu olur. Ancak bu tespiti yapabilmek i\u00e7in taraflar\u0131n ger\u00e7ek veya farazi iradelerinin yoruma elveri\u015fli olmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. <em>(58 Eren; a.g.e., s.400.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nedensellik ba\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeden \u00f6nce aranacak ve s\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulduktan sonra nedensellik ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kesilmesinden bahsedilemeyecektir.<em> (K\u00fcr\u015fat; a.g.e., s.34-35.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taraflar aras\u0131nda meydana gelen s\u00f6zle\u015fmede hilenin i\u00e7eri\u011fi, hileye maruz kalan taraf\u00e7a biliniyorsa ve buna ra\u011fmen s\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulmu\u015fsa, hileli davran\u0131\u015f ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme aras\u0131ndan illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir. Zira burada ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan irade, fesada u\u011framam\u0131\u015f olup, sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 ve \u00f6zg\u00fcr bir irade sonucu s\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulmu\u015ftur. Bir kimse s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli olan bilgilere kendi ula\u015fm\u0131\u015fsa ve bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa bu durumda da nedensellik ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmaya gerek yoktur. Zira, hile ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmemi\u015ftir. <em>(Ispartal\u0131; a.g.e., s.146.- Yavuz; a.g.e. s.30.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte oldu\u011fundan hakim taraf\u0131ndan da resen ele al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekmektedir165\u0130ptal hakk\u0131 s\u00fcresinde kullan\u0131lmazsa s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc olarak onanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furacakt\u0131r. Yine iptal hakk\u0131 yenilik do\u011furan bir hak oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in kural \u015farta ba\u011fl\u0131 tutularak kullan\u0131lamaz<em> (Ayd\u0131n ve Remzi; a.g.e., s.124. ; G\u00fclerci ve K\u0131l\u0131n\u00e7; a.g.e., s.117. ; Bkz. YARG 1. HD. T. 18.09.2013, E.2013\/9292, K. 2013\/12899.-166 Nart; a.g.e., s.36. ; Eren; a.g.e., s.412.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Geriye etkili olarak s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin sona erdirilmesi sonucunda:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taraflar\u0131n sakat s\u00f6zle\u015fme kapsam\u0131nda o ana kadar birbirine ifa etmedikleri edimlerin ifas\u0131 istenemez hale gelecektir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc taraflar aras\u0131nda ortada ifaya neden olacak s\u00f6zle\u015fme kalmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130ptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce taraflarca ifa edilen edimler de kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 iade olunacakt\u0131r. <em>(Yavuz; a.g.e., s.66. ; Bkz. YARG 1. HD. T. 04.06.2015, E. 2015\/7700, K. 2015\/8333.)<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptaline y\u00f6nelik beyan\u0131n ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fme \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 olsa dahi hi\u00e7bir \u015fekle tabi de\u011fildir. Tek tarafl\u0131 beyan kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 meydana getirmektedir. \u0130ptal beyan\u0131 \u015fekle tabi olmaks\u0131z\u0131n varmas\u0131 gerekli tek tarafl\u0131 bir i\u015flem olmakla birlikte, iptal beyan\u0131n\u0131 ispat a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda fayda bulunmaktad\u0131r. <em>(Reiso\u011flu; a.g.e., s.130. ; Eren; a.g.e., s.412. ; \u00d6zkaya; a.g.e., s.192. ; Ayan; a.g.e., s.202.-Aslan; a.g.e., s.95. ; Kocayusufpa\u015fao\u011flu vd; a.g.e., s.463.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130ptal beyan\u0131, kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ula\u015f\u0131nca sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kendili\u011finden do\u011furmaktad\u0131r. \u0130ptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n da i\u00e7erisinde bulundu\u011fu yenilik do\u011furucu haklar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in dava yoluna gidilmesi kural olarak zorunlu de\u011fildir. <em>(Eren; a.g.e., s.414. ; Kocayusufpa\u015fao\u011flu vd; a.g.e., s.463. ; Kay\u0131han; a.g.e., s.180. ; Bkz. YARG 1. HD. T. 04.10.2017, E. 2015\/2245, K. 2017\/4960.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Defi hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in iki \u015fart\u0131n birlikte ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi gerekmektedir: Hile nedeniyle iradesi sakatlanan taraf kendi edimin ifa etmemi\u015f olmal\u0131 ve kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n da hileye maruz kalan taraftan edimin ifas\u0131n\u0131 talep ve dava etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca defi hakk\u0131, iptal hakk\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre ile s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 tutulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <em>(Eren; a.g.e., s.416.) <\/em>Hileye maruz kalan taraf iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmad\u0131k\u00e7a dayanak s\u00f6zle\u015fmede irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulundu\u011funu hakim re\u2019sen ele alamaz. \u0130ptal talebini sadece iradesi sakatlanan taraf ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebildi\u011finden, iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n def-i hakk\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturdu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. \u0130tiraz hakim taraf\u0131ndan re\u2019sen (kendili\u011finden) g\u00f6zetilirken, defi hakk\u0131 hakim taraf\u0131ndan re\u2019sen nazara al\u0131namaz. itiraz\u0131n hakim taraf\u0131ndan re\u2019sen nazara al\u0131nabilmesi i\u00e7in, dava dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde yerini alm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir. Ancak itiraz tekil eden olay taraflarca ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcrse, bunu ispat etmek taraflara d\u00fc\u015fer. Defi hakk\u0131 ise, dava dosyas\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a anla\u015f\u0131lsa bile hakim taraf\u0131ndan re\u2019sen g\u00f6zetilemez. Taraflar\u0131n defi hakk\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesi gerekir. Defi bir hakt\u0131r, itiraz ise bir olayd\u0131r.\u00a0 itiraz bir olay oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, itiraz lehine sonu\u00e7 do\u011furacak ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan tek tarafl\u0131 bir vazge\u00e7me ile olay ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lamaz. Defi, bir hak oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, ancak hak sahibi taraf\u0131ndan ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilirken; bir olay olan itiraz ise, menfaati olan herkes taraf\u0131ndan ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Defi hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131, hakk\u0131 sona erdirmez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130ptal hakk\u0131 yenilik do\u011furucu bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fundan bundan d\u00f6n\u00fclmesi ve vazge\u00e7ilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. \u0130ptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 ile birlikte belirli bir s\u00fcre ge\u00e7mi\u015f olsa da art\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ge\u00e7erlilik sa\u011flanamayacakt\u0131r. .\u0130ptal edilen s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ayn\u0131 \u015fartlarda yeniden yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu y\u00fczden taraflar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme, h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini iptal edilen s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131ndan itibaren de\u011fil; ancak ikinci s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 an\u0131ndan itibaren do\u011furacakt\u0131r.<em> (G\u00fclerci ve K\u0131l\u0131n\u00e7; a.g.e., s.117. ; Aslan; a.g.e., s.94.; Y\u0131ld\u0131r\u0131m; a.g.e., s.150.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">TBK madde 39\u2019da aldat\u0131lana bir y\u0131ll\u0131k iptal s\u00fcresi tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r, hileye maruz kalan taraf kanunda belirtilen bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmezse, art\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olamayacakt\u0131r. Bu bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre ise aldatman\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenilmesinden itibaren ba\u015flamaktad\u0131r ve iptal iradesi kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa vard\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren de sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011furmaktad\u0131r. Ancak aldat\u0131lan lehine d\u00fczenlenen TBK 39\/2\u2019de, her ne kadar s\u00f6zle\u015fme onaylanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131lacak olsa da bu durumun tazminat hakk\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmayaca\u011f\u0131 hususu yer almaktad\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan taraf s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye icazet vermemekle birlikte bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre dolmadan \u00f6l\u00fcrse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iptal hakk\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131na ge\u00e7mektedir ve iptal i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre hile eyleminin muris taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi andan itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flayacakt\u0131r. Muris \u00f6lmeden \u00f6nce s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali i\u00e7in dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015fsa, a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n da miras\u00e7\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan devam ettirilmesi gerekmektedir. \u0130ptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mi\u015f oldu\u011funu ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptalinin sa\u011flanamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden taraf\u0131n, s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mi\u015f oldu\u011funu ve hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin ba\u015flamas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayan hileyi \u00f6\u011frenme vak\u0131as\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmesi gerekmektedir. \u0130ptal beyan\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa varmas\u0131 gerekli tek tarafl\u0131 beyanla kullan\u0131labilmektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hileye maruz kalan taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye a\u00e7\u0131k veya kanaat verici davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc olarak onay vermesi veya belirli bir s\u00fcrenin sessiz kal\u0131narak ge\u00e7irilmesi durumlar\u0131nda hileli s\u00f6zle\u015fme ba\u015ftan itibaren tamamen ge\u00e7erlilik kazanmaktad\u0131r, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu durumda iradesi fesada u\u011frat\u0131lan taraf\u0131n iptal hakk\u0131 da ortadan kalkmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ihtiya\u00e7 vard\u0131r. Birinci \u015fart &#8221;Aldatma fiilidir&#8221; . Aldatan \u015fah\u0131s di\u011ferini yan\u0131ltm\u0131\u015f (hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f) olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Fakat kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bu yan\u0131lman\u0131n esasl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmez. <em>(TBK.m.36\/1).<\/em> \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc aldatan hi\u00e7 bir surette korunmaya lay\u0131k de\u011fildir. Aldatan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda, belirli konu ve hususlarda do\u011fru olmayan bilgiler vermekte veya baz\u0131 hususlar\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 gerekirken kasten gizlemektedir. \u0130kinci \u015fart, &#8221;Aldatma kast\u0131d\u0131r&#8221;. Aldatan, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya ikna etmek i\u00e7in ona bilerek ve isteyerek<em> (kasten)<\/em> ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, yalan s\u00f6yleyende kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 aldatmak ve <span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>ONUN GER\u00c7E\u011e\u0130 B\u0130LMES\u0130 HAL\u0130NDE YAPMAYACAK OLDU\u011eU B\u0130R S\u00d6ZLE\u015eMEY\u0130 YAPMAYA SEVK ETMEK<\/strong><\/span> niyeti bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer bir kimse, bilmemesi a\u011f\u0131r bir kusur te\u015fkil etmesine ra\u011fmen, durumu bilmeden bir beyanda bulunmu\u015f ise aldatma kast\u0131 yoktur. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fart ise, &#8221;\u0130lliyet ba\u011f\u0131d\u0131r&#8221; . S\u00f6zle\u015fme aldatma sonucu, onun etkisi ile yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi, aldatma olmasayd\u0131 ya hi\u00e7 yapmayacak ya da daha iyi \u015fartlarda yapacak idiyse, illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur. Aldatma fiili, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n asli \u015fart\u0131 olmal\u0131, aldatma ile s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda tabi bir illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. <strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>(Eren,F..Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler,s.414 vd., HGK.20.10.2010 T.2010\/1-502 E.2010\/536\u00a0 K.) <\/em><\/span><\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Gerek hata halinde ve gerekse de hilede; <span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>ger\u00e7e\u011fi bilmesi durumunda yap\u0131lmayacak bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme<\/strong><\/span> s\u00f6z konusudur.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>2-) HATA (YANILMA) : <\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">\u0130<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">rade i<\/span>le beyan aras\u0131nda istemeyerek meydana gelen bir uyumsuzluk halidir. Aldatma (hile) ise genel olarak bir kimseyi irade beyan\u0131nda bulunmaya, \u00f6zellikle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya sevk etmek i\u00e7in onda kasten hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131rmak veya esasen var olan hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131y\u0131 korumak yahut devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlan\u0131r. Hatada yan\u0131lma, hilede ise kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak yan\u0131ltma s\u00f6z konusudur.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bor\u00e7lar Kanunumuzun 24. maddesinde hangi hallerin esasl\u0131 hata olarak nitelendirilece\u011fi s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re esasl\u0131 hata halleri \u015funlard\u0131r:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u2022 S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin niteli\u011finde hata:<\/strong><\/span> S\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma iradesine sahip olan ki\u015finin ger\u00e7ekte yapmak istedi\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fme yerine ba\u015fka bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme iradesini beyan etmesidir. \u00d6rne\u011fin, sat\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapma iradesine sahip olan bir ki\u015finin hata ile ba\u011f\u0131\u015flama s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapma iradesini beyan etmesi.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u2022 S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusunda hata: <\/strong><\/span>Ki\u015finin, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusu olan e\u015fya ile ilgili sahip oldu\u011fu irade yerine farkl\u0131 bir e\u015fya hakk\u0131nda irade beyan etmesidir. \u00d6rne\u011fin, bir ki\u015finin vir\u00fcs program\u0131 sat\u0131n almak isterken bir oyun program\u0131 alma y\u00f6n\u00fcnde iradesini beyan etmesidir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">\u2022 Ki\u015fide hata:<\/span><\/strong> Ki\u015finin s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmak istedi\u011fi ki\u015fi yerine baka bir ki\u015fiye s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma iradesini a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131d\u0131r. Evini m\u00fcteahhit A\u2019ya yapt\u0131rmak isteyen M\u00fcteahhit B\u2019ye evini yapmas\u0131n\u0131 istemesi ki\u015fide hata haline \u00f6rnek olarak verilebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u2022 \u0130vazda\/Bedelde hata:<\/strong><\/span> S\u00f6zle\u015fme taraf\u0131n\u0131n bizzat kendi ya da kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n ediminin miktar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda hataya d\u00fc\u015fmesidir. Basit hesap yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 akdin s\u0131hhatine engel olmaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u2022 Temel hatas\u0131: <\/strong><\/span>Bir kimseyi s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya iten sebepte (saikte) hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclebilir. Ancak hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, saik hatas\u0131 esasl\u0131 hata olarak nitelendirilemez. Durum bu olmakla birlikte a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki ko\u015fullar\u0131 birlikte ta\u015f\u0131yan saik hatas\u0131 temel hatas\u0131 olarak kabul edilir ve BK. md.24 kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilir. Bu \u015fartlar:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8211; S\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulurken, ki\u015finin iradesinin olu\u015fmas\u0131 a\u015famas\u0131nda bir hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r.<br \/>\n&#8211; Hata s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin esasl\u0131 unsurlar\u0131 ile ilgili olmal\u0131d\u0131r.<br \/>\n&#8211; Ticari do\u011fruluk kurallar\u0131nca bu hata esasl\u0131 hata olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilmelidir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf hatay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanabilir. E\u011fer bu s\u00fcre iptal hakk\u0131 kullan\u0131lmadan ge\u00e7irilirse, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ba\u015ftan itibaren ge\u00e7erli bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011furur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hata nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptali, iyi niyet kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak istenemez. \u0130ptal hakk\u0131, MK. md. 2\u2019deki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131 ile s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. Di\u011fer yandan hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf kusurlu ise, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz say\u0131lmas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131, di\u011fer taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz say\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lamak zorundad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Basit hesap yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131<\/strong> esasl\u0131 hata kabul edilmemekte, bu hallerde basit yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesi ile yetinilmektedir. \u0130letmede hata TBK md.33 gere\u011fince esasl\u0131 hata olarak kabul edilmektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yan\u0131lan\u0131n, yan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 saiki s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin temeli saymas\u0131 ve bununda i\u015f ili\u015fkilerinde ge\u00e7erli d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131na uygun olmas\u0131 halinde, <strong>yan\u0131lma esasl\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r<\/strong>. Ancak <strong>bu durumun kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u00e7a bilinebilir olmas\u0131 gerekir. Esasl\u0131 olmayan hatada ise, esas itibariyle saik hatas\u0131 s\u00f6z konusudur. TBK md 32 h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re, saikte yan\u0131lma esasl\u0131 yan\u0131lma say\u0131lmaz.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">TBK Md.35 gere\u011fince s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011fan zarardan kastedilen, menfi ve m\u00fcspet zarard\u0131r. <strong>Menfi zarar; s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yerine getirilece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle yap\u0131lan masraflar\u0131 kapsar. M\u00fcspet zarar ise, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifas\u0131ndan beklenen yarar\u0131n kayb\u0131ndan do\u011fan zarard\u0131r. Menfi zarar\u0131n yan\u0131nda m\u00fcspet zarar\u0131n da talep edilebilmesi i\u00e7in bunun hakkaniyet gerektirmesi gerekir.<\/strong>\u00a0<strong>Bu zarar\u0131n talep edilebilmesi i\u00e7in, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yan\u0131lma nedeniyle h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz hale gelmesi, zarar g\u00f6renin kusurlu olmamas\u0131, yan\u0131lan\u0131n kusurlu olmas\u0131 ve kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc nedeniyle bir zarara u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Yan\u0131lg\u0131 3.ki\u015finin aldatmas\u0131ndan do\u011fmu\u015f ise yan\u0131lan\u0131n bir kusuru yoksa kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n zarar\u0131ndan sorumlu tutulamaz.<\/strong> Kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n zarar ziyan\u0131n\u0131 istemek hakk\u0131, yan\u0131lmaya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n yan\u0131lmaya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ve s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 kalmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirdi\u011fi anda do\u011far. Hakkaniyet gerektirdi\u011fi takdirde hakim u\u011fran\u0131lan olumsuz (menfi) zarar\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda olumlu (m\u00fcspet) zarara da h\u00fckmedebilecektir. Zarar g\u00f6renin de kusurlu olmas\u0131, zararda indirim de\u011fil, zarar\u0131n hi\u00e7 \u00f6denmemesi sonucunu do\u011furur. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011fine karar verildikten sonra taraflar\u0131n birbirlerinden ald\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 iade y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc do\u011far. <strong>Yan\u0131lan\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki irade bildirimi kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7 do\u011furur,\u00a0 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7ersiz hale gelir. Yan\u0131lan\u0131n bu beyan\u0131 bozucu yenilik do\u011furan bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 olup,\u00a0 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren ge\u00e7ersiz duruma d\u00fc\u015fer.<\/strong> Gerek doktrinde gerekse uygulamada kabul edildi\u011fi \u00fczere menfi zarar;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulu\u015fu s\u0131ras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan ve iptal nedeniyle bo\u015fa giden masraflar, seyahat, haberle\u015fme masraflar\u0131 gibi.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine g\u00fcvenilerek yap\u0131lan ifa masraflar\u0131, sigorta, iptale kadar yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f i\u015fin bedeli, \u00f6denen faizler gibi<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fme konusu olan \u015feyin devir ve temliki s\u0131ras\u0131nda u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar, nakil s\u0131ras\u0131ndaki kaza, sel, yang\u0131n gibi nedenlerden do\u011fan zararlar.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine g\u00fcvenilerek ba\u015fka bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma imkan\u0131n\u0131n ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan do\u011fan zararlar gibi zararlar\u0131 kapsar. <em>(Eraslan \u00d6zkaya, Yan\u0131lma-Korkutma-Aldatma Davalar\u0131, sy.187-188)<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yarg\u0131tay hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, iddian\u0131n tutarl\u0131, inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131, ger\u00e7eklere ve <strong>hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmas\u0131<\/strong> halinde kabul etmektedir. Yine Yarg\u0131tay, hile ile somut olay\u0131 bir arada de\u011ferlendirerek, taraflar\u0131n ya\u015fam bi\u00e7imlerinin hile sebebiyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131na etkisinin olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc benimsemi\u015ftir.<em> (YARGITAY 11.H.D., \u201c18.10.1984 tarih ve E.1984\/4816.K.1984\/4851 say\u0131l\u0131 karar,\u201d Yarg\u0131tay 11.H.D., 31. 05.1983 tarih ve E.1983\/2568.K.1983\/2837 say\u0131l\u0131 karar,\u201d (naklen G\u00dcRB\u00dcZ, A. H., Yarg\u0131tay Uygulamas\u0131 I\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Ticari Senetlerin iptali Davalar\u0131 ve Ticari Senetlere \u00d6zg\u00fc Sorunlar, istanbul, 1984, s.749)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hileye u\u011frayan ki\u015fi hileyi \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131l i\u00e7erisinde bu hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmal\u0131d\u0131r. (BK. md.31) Hileye u\u011frayan, bu hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmaz ya da bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde <strong>akde icazet verirse<\/strong>, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erli bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011furur. \u201d <em>(YARGITAY 1.H.D., \u201c04.05.2004 tarih ve E.2004\/493.K.2004\/5181 say\u0131l\u0131 karar,\u201d-(YARGITAY 1.H.D., \u201c29.03.2004 tarih ve E.2004\/3092.K.2004\/3555 say\u0131l\u0131 karar,\u201d)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">T\u00fcrk hukukunda irade bozuklu\u011funa ba\u011flanan yapt\u0131r\u0131m ise bir kesin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck ( butlan) h\u00e2li de\u011fildir. M\u00fclga BK\u2019n\u0131n 23 ve devam\u0131 maddelerinde \u201c\u2026ilzam olunamaz.\u201d (BK.23), \u201c\u2026o akit ile ilzam olunmaz.\u201d (BK.28), \u201c\u2026kendi hakk\u0131nda l\u00fczum ifade etmez\u201d (BK.29\/I), TBK\u2019nda ise \u201c\u2026 ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaz.\u201d (TBK. m.30), \u201c\u2026s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir.\u201d (TBK. m.36 ve 37\/1) ibareleri kullan\u0131lmak suretiyle irade bozuklu\u011fuyla yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin, iradesi hata, hile veya ikrahla sakatlanan kimseyi ba\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclerek, bu ki\u015fiye belli bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde kullanabilece\u011fi iptal hakk\u0131 tan\u0131m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Kanun, esasl\u0131 olmayan hatalar\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptaline yol a\u00e7mas\u0131n\u0131 ise kabul etmemi\u015ftir. S\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulurken esasl\u0131 yan\u0131lmaya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaz ( TBK. m.30, BK. m.23). Ancak taraflardan biri, di\u011ferinin aldatmas\u0131 sonucu s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa, yan\u0131lma esasl\u0131 olmasa bile, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir (TBK. m. 36\/1, BK. m. 28\/1). Az yukar\u0131da de\u011finildi\u011fi gibi iradesi sakatlanan taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmas\u0131, di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmesi TBK\u2019n\u0131n 39. maddesinde (818 say\u0131l\u0131 BK\u2019n\u0131n 31. maddesinde) belli bir s\u00fcreye ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yan\u0131lma veya aldatma sebebiyle ya da korkutulma sonucunda s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, yan\u0131lma veya aldatmay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi ya da korkutman\u0131n etkisinin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmez veya verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri istemezse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi onam\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r (TBK. m. 39\/1).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Buradaki s\u00fcre Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 01.06.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/14-281 E., 2011\/373 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre niteli\u011finde olup, hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin de Kanunun a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca hata ve hilenin\/yan\u0131lma ve aldatman\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. \u0130radesi sakatlanan taraf\u0131n hata veya hileyi \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi andan itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmesi veya verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri istemesi zorunludur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u00d6te yandan 01.01.2002 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun \u201cResm\u00ee belgelerle ispat\u201d kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 7. maddesi \u201c Resmi sicil ve senetler, belgeledikleri olgular\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funa kan\u0131t olu\u015fturur. Bunlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131, kanunlarda ba\u015fka bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, herhangi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermekte oldu\u011fundan, s\u00f6zle\u015fme resm\u00ee senetle yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi hata ve hile olgusu her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispatlanabilir.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">Halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olup uygulanan<\/span>; 17.08.2013 tarih 28738 say\u0131l\u0131 Tapu Sicil T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Md.21\/2, 22\/2-3-4, 18\/1, 19\/1-2, 16\/1 ve 27402 say\u0131l\u0131 Tapu M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerince D\u00fczenlenen Resmi Senetlere \u0130li\u015fkin Usul ve Esaslar Hakk\u0131nda Y\u00f6netmelik;<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u0130rade beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 olmas\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>MADDE 13<\/strong> \u2013 (1) Resm\u00ee senette yer alan irade beyanlar\u0131ndan <strong>taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 olarak bilgi sahibi olmas\u0131 sa\u011flan\u0131r.<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u0130rade beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n birbirine uygun olmas\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>MADDE 14<\/strong> \u2013 (1) Resm\u00ee senetteki irade beyanlar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k olur. Ki\u015fiden ki\u015fiye de\u011fi\u015fik yorumlanacak kavramlara yer verilmez. Akdin t\u00fcr\u00fcne g\u00f6re b\u00fct\u00fcn esasl\u0131 noktalara yer verilir. <strong>Taraflardan birinin irade beyan\u0131nda yer alan unsurlar\u0131n her birini, taraflardan di\u011ferinin irade beyan\u0131 tam olarak kar\u015f\u0131lar. Bu suretle akdin konusuna ili\u015fkin b\u00fct\u00fcn noktalarda taraflar\u0131n anla\u015fm\u0131\u015f olmalar\u0131 sa\u011flan\u0131r.<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Resm\u00ee senedin okunmas\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>MADDE 18<\/strong> \u2013 (1) D\u00fczenlenen resm\u00ee senet; haz\u0131rlayan g\u00f6revli taraf\u0131ndan, m\u00fcd\u00fcr ve\/veya g\u00f6revlendirilen memur, taraflar ile haz\u0131r bulundurulmu\u015f ise tan\u0131klar ve terc\u00fcman huzurunda <strong>y\u00fcksek sesle, herkesin anlayaca\u011f\u0131 \u015fekilde okunur. Taraflar isterlerse resm\u00ee senedi kendileri de al\u0131p okuyabilirler.<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u0130stemde bulunacaklar<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>(28738 say\u0131l\u0131 Tapu Sicili T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fc); MADDE 17<\/strong> \u2013 (1) Kanun\u00ee istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, <strong>tapu sicilinde hak sahibi olan ki\u015filer istemde bulunabilir.<\/strong> Tescilden \u00f6nce hak sahibi olmu\u015f ki\u015filer de hakk\u0131n tescili i\u00e7in gerekli belgeleri ibraz ederek istemde bulunabilirler. <em>(Talep Formunun Tanzim edilmesinde istem hak ve yetkisi)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>NOTERL\u0130K KANUNU<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Kanun Numaras\u0131 : 1512<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Kabul Tarihi : 18\/1\/1972<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Yay\u0131mland\u0131\u011f\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete : Tarih : 5\/2\/1972<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Tutana\u011f\u0131n okunmas\u0131 :<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Madde 86 \u2013 Tutana\u011f\u0131n, ilgilinin ger\u00e7ek iste\u011fi hakk\u0131ndaki beyan\u0131 yaz\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra okumas\u0131 i\u00e7in kendisine verilir. \u0130lgili tutana\u011f\u0131 okur, i\u00e7indekiler iste\u011fine uygun ise, bu husus da yaz\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra alt\u0131n\u0131 imzalar.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><b>NOTERL\u0130K KANUNU Y\u00d6NETMEL\u0130\u011e\u0130<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>Yetene\u011fin tespiti:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\"><strong>Madde 91 &#8211;<\/strong>\u00a0Noterin ilgilinin yetene\u011fi hakk\u0131nda bir kan\u0131 sahibi olmas\u0131 gereklidir. Temyiz kudretine sahip bulunan ve i\u015flemin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re gerekli ya\u015fa girdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lan herkes hukuki i\u015flemleri yapmaya ehil olup, bu ya\u015f resmi belge ile saptan\u0131r. Tan\u0131k veya kan\u0131 ile ya\u015f tespit edilemez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\">\u0130lgilinin ya\u015fl\u0131l\u0131k, hastal\u0131k veya d\u0131\u015f g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f\u00fc itibariyle yetene\u011finden \u015f\u00fcphe edilmesi veya bu konuda ihbar ve \u015fayet bulunmas\u0131 hallerinde temyiz kudretinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 doktor raporu ile saptan\u0131r. Bu takdirde metnin i\u00e7inde tarih ve numaras\u0131 ile rapordan bahsedilir, raporun asl\u0131 i\u015flemin noterde kalan n\u00fcshas\u0131na eklenir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\"><strong>Hukuki i\u015flerin belgelendirilmesi an\u0131nda ilgili iradesini serbest\u00e7e ve kendi iste\u011fine uygun olarak beyan etmelidir. Beyan\u0131n tam ve eksiksiz olarak yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 gereklidir. Yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re gerekli sorular\u0131n sorularak i\u015flemin sonucu hakk\u0131nda ilgiliye a\u00e7\u0131klama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereklidir.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olup uygulanmakta olan yukar\u0131da belirtilen mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri gere\u011fince, tapu memur ve yetkililerinin, <strong>tapu i\u015fleminin mahiyeti, niteli\u011fi ve esasl\u0131 unsurlar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda taraflar\u0131 bilgilendirme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc<\/strong> s\u00f6z konusudur. Ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde tanzim edilen s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re taraflar\u0131n onay\u0131n\u0131 almadan veya ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sahibi talebinin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka nitelikte i\u015flemi ihtiva eden s\u00f6zle\u015fme haz\u0131rlayarak, kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 anla\u015fma sa\u011flanmadan ve taraflar\u0131 i\u015flem mahiyeti hakk\u0131nda bilgilendirmeden i\u015flem ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmeleri a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a TCK Md. 257\/1-2 gere\u011fince g\u00f6revi k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanma veya g\u00f6revi ihmal su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. <strong>Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sahibinin istemi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka nitelikte i\u015flemi ihtiva eden talep formu olu\u015fturulmas\u0131<\/strong> da adli sorumlulu\u011fu gerektirecek, TCK md 204 te belirtilen resmi belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7u olu\u015facakt\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Uygulamada a\u00e7\u0131lan tapu iptal tescil davalar\u0131nda davac\u0131lar; tapu senedini okumadan imzalad\u0131klar\u0131, i\u015flem \u00f6ncesi ve s\u0131ras\u0131nda yetkili memurlarca kendilerine s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011fi hakk\u0131nda herhangi bir bilgi verilmedi\u011fi, esas\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmay\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcp zannetmekte iken iradesi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda farkl\u0131 nitelikte bir i\u015flemin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini iddia ederek<\/strong><\/span> hata h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine dayand\u0131klar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. <em>(\u00d6rne\u011fin ba\u011f\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapacakken sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131lmas\u0131 veya ipotek i\u015flemi yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 zannederken sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi yap\u0131lmas\u0131 veya kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapmay\u0131 arzularken bedelsiz intifa s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131lmas\u0131 veya 2 no&#8217;lu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 satacakken 3 no&#8217;lu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 satmas\u0131 gibi)<\/em> Bu \u015fekildeki iddialar\u0131n s\u00fcbut bulmas\u0131 durumunda i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren memur ve yetkililerin cezai sorumluluklar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011faca\u011f\u0131 a\u015fikard\u0131r. <strong>\u0130\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren memurun, tapu senedini, y\u00fcksek sesle herkesin anlayabilece\u011fi \u015fekilde okuyarak taraflar\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131p anla\u015fmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 tespit etme ve sonucuna g\u00f6re i\u015flemi icra etme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc vard\u0131r.<\/strong> <strong>Taraflardan biri engelli ise, i\u015flemin i\u00e7eri\u011fini anlayabilecek ve vak\u0131f olabilecek vas\u0131talarla gerekli olana\u011f\u0131n kendisine sunulmas\u0131 zaruridir<\/strong>. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu mahiyette a\u00e7\u0131lan tapu iptal ve tescil davalar\u0131nda, iddialar\u0131n s\u00fcbut bulup bulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti bak\u0131m\u0131ndan i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren tapu memurlar\u0131 ve yetkilileri hakk\u0131nda CBS ye su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunulmal\u0131, i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren tapu memuru, daval\u0131 yanca tan\u0131k listesinde belirtilerek mahkemede dinlenilmelidir. <strong>Maddi vak\u0131ay\u0131 tespit eden; a<\/strong><strong>dli tahkikat sonucunda verilen kararlara veya idari soru\u015fturma raporuna istinaden soru\u015fturma izni verilmemesine dair \u0130l \u0130dare Kurulu M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc karar\u0131na veya soru\u015fturma izni verilmemesi karar\u0131na itiraz \u00fczerine B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesince verilen kesin kararlara, hukuk mahkemesinin itibar etmesi\/g\u00f6zetmesi gereklidir. Maddi vak\u0131ay\u0131 tespit edip davan\u0131n esas\u0131na etki eden idare mahkemesi kararlar\u0131n\u0131n da hukuk mahkemesince g\u00f6zetilmesi gerekir. Benzer \u015fekilde tarafs\u0131z tan\u0131k stat\u00fcs\u00fcnde bulunan ve i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren tapu memur beyan\u0131na da hukuk mahkemesince itibar edilmesi gereklidir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin y\u00f6nlendirmesi ve y\u00f6nlendiren ki\u015fiye duyulan g\u00fcven nedeniyle tapu senedine okumadan imza at\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n\u00a0 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi durumunda, hile h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine dayanma s\u00f6z konusu olacakt\u0131r. Hile bilmesi halinde yap\u0131lmayacak s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi ifade etmektedir. Tapu memurunun davac\u0131y\u0131 i\u015flem mahiyeti hakk\u0131nda bilgilendirdi\u011fi, adli veya idari herhangi bir kusurunun tespit edilmedi\u011fi durumda, bu nitelikteki hile iddias\u0131 da ispatlanamam\u0131\u015f say\u0131lacakt\u0131r.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><em><strong>Maddi Vak\u0131ay\u0131 Tespit Eden ve Eldeki Davay\u0131 Etkileyecek \u0130dare Mahkemesi Kararlar\u0131n\u0131n da Hukuk Mahkemesince G\u00f6zetilmesi ve\/veya Bekletici Sorun Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi;<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re; davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131lar hakk\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 23\/08\/2010 tarihli \u015fikayet ba\u015fvurusunun z\u0131mnen reddine ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin iptali istemiyle idare aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan davada, &#8230; 2. <strong>\u0130dare Mahkemesince<\/strong> verilen 29\/11\/2011 tarih, 2010\/2749 esas, 2011\/1837 say\u0131l\u0131 davan\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n, &#8230; 5. Dairesinin 01\/06\/2017 tarih, 2016\/15959 esas, 2017\/15792 karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile bozuldu\u011fu, bozma ilam\u0131nda maddi vak\u0131alara ili\u015fkin belirlemeler bulundu\u011fu, bozmaya uyularak yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda &#8230; 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinin 20\/11\/2017 tarih 2017\/3110 esas 2017\/3816 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile i\u015flemin iptaline karar verildi\u011fi, bu karar\u0131n halen Dan\u0131\u015ftay 5. Dairesinde temyiz incelemesinde bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u015eu durumda, idari i\u015flemin iptaline ili\u015fkin <strong>dava dosyas\u0131n\u0131n sonucu eldeki davay\u0131 etkileyece\u011finden<\/strong>, bu yarg\u0131laman\u0131n sonucu beklenmeli ve ona g\u00f6re yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirme ile karar verilmelidir. Mahkemece a\u00e7\u0131klanan bu y\u00f6n g\u00f6zetilmeden eksik inceleme ile karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir. <strong><em>(T.C. YARGITAY D\u00d6RD\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2018\/630 Karar : 2018\/5334 Tarih : 05.07.2018)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;Davac\u0131 \u015firket lehine sonu\u00e7lan\u0131p kesinle\u015fen &#8230; 3.\u0130dare Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 2014\/1076 Esas, 2015\/2472 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 da nazara al\u0131narak verilen karar\u0131n vak\u0131a ve hukuki de\u011ferlendirmesinde usul ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmekle&#8230;&#8221; <strong><em>(T.C. YARGITAY ONUNCU HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2022\/12887 Karar : 2023\/4060 Tarih : 11.04.2023)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dairenin 07\/04\/2021 tarihli ve 2020\/773 E., 2021\/2118 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; &#8221;&#8221;&#8230;dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n.. daval\u0131 &#8230; ad\u0131na tescilinin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan idari i\u015flem, yani 06.07.2009 tarihli ve 53 say\u0131l\u0131 Belediye Meclis Karar\u0131 <strong>idari yarg\u0131 yerinde iptal edildi\u011fine ve bu karar kesinle\u015fti\u011fine g\u00f6re<\/strong>, sicilin illetten yoksun hale geldi\u011fi, ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle ilk el konumunda olan daval\u0131 &#8230; ad\u0131na olu\u015fan sicil kayd\u0131n\u0131n T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun 1025. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca yolsuz tescil niteli\u011finde bulundu\u011fu ku\u015fkusuzdur&#8230;H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.&#8221; gerek\u00e7esiyle B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, <strong><em>(T.C. YARGITAY B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2022\/3989 Karar : 2022\/7527 Tarih : 15.11.2022)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca; yukar\u0131da belirtilen eksikliklerin giderilmesi, <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>cezai ve idari soru\u015fturma dosyalar\u0131nda mevcut beyanlar\u0131n birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi,<\/strong> <\/span>yine yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkeler do\u011frultusunda ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme yap\u0131larak, i\u015flem s\u0131ras\u0131nda irade fesad\u0131n\u0131n olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmas\u0131, i\u015flemin hileli oldu\u011funa kanaat getirilmesi halinde, son kay\u0131t malikinin iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken, eksik inceleme ile yetinilerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. <strong><em>(T.C.YARGITAY B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas: 2014\/18487 Karar: 2016\/7140 Tarih: 13.06.2016)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<li>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca ya\u011fma (gasp) su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir nitelikte delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, 11 ay sonra \u015fikayet edildi\u011fi gerek\u00e7eleriyle takipsizlik karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f ve kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Ya\u011fma (gasp) su\u00e7unun unsurlar\u0131 tart\u0131\u015f\u0131larak takipsizlik karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f, ancak tehdit y\u00f6n\u00fcnden deliller de\u011ferlendirilmemi\u015ftir. Gerek mahkemede, gerekse <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda dinlenen davac\u0131 ve davac\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 daval\u0131n\u0131n ya\u011fma (gasp) su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmeyecek olsa da, \u00f6zellikle tan\u0131k Carrol&#8217;un beyan\u0131yla davac\u0131n\u0131n \u015fiddet, bask\u0131 ve tehdit alt\u0131nda zorla evden notere g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve vekalet al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7e\u011fini ortadan kald\u0131rmaz&#8221;<\/strong><\/span> <strong><em>T.C. YARGITAY B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas: 2009\/4697 Karar: 2009\/8375 Tarih: 14.07.2009<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Somut olayda; mahkemece taraf tan\u0131klar\u0131 ile mahalli bilirki\u015filer dinlenmi\u015f, ke\u015fif yap\u0131l\u0131p bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131 dosya aras\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f, eldeki dosyadaki iddia ile ilgili davac\u0131n\u0131n \u015fikayet konusu yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 Savc\u0131l\u0131k dosyalar\u0131 getirtilip, bu suretle sonuca gidilmi\u015ftir. Ne var ki, tan\u0131k ve mahalli bilirki\u015fi beyanlar\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkili olup, savc\u0131l\u0131k dosyas\u0131ndaki beyanlar da yeterince irdelenmemi\u015ftir. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca; beyanlar\u0131 al\u0131nan tan\u0131k ve mahalli bilirki\u015filer tekrar dinlenerek, gerekirse y\u00fczle\u015ftirilerek, <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>savc\u0131l\u0131k dosyas\u0131ndaki beyanlar da dikkate al\u0131n\u0131p \u00e7eli\u015fkili beyanlar\u0131n giderilmesi<\/strong><\/span>, daval\u0131n\u0131n .. &#8230; parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara haks\u0131z m\u00fcdahalesi olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, varsa ne zaman ve hangi s\u00fcreyle devam etti\u011finin belirlenmesi sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.&#8221; <strong><em>T.C. YARGITAY B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2014\/9137 Karar : 2014\/13873 Tarih : 09.09.2014<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<ul>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Her ne kadar 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 74. (m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 53. maddesi) maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca kural olarak <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">ceza mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan verilen beraat karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamaz ise de orada belirlenen veya belirlenecek olgular\u0131n eldeki dava bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r.<\/span><\/strong><\/span> Hal b\u00f6yle olunca; taraflarla ilgili Alaca Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 27.11.2013 tarihli, 2012\/7 Esas, 2013\/227 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesinin beklenmesi, <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>ondan sonra ceza dosyas\u0131n\u0131n eldeki dava dosyas\u0131 aras\u0131na al\u0131narak ceza dosyas\u0131ndaki ve eldeki dosyadaki delillerin birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi<\/strong> <\/span>gerekirken eksik soru\u015fturma\u00a0 ile yetinilerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<strong><em>(T.C. YARGITAY B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas: 2014\/11612 Karar: 2014\/14462 Tarih: 18.09.2014)<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ONB\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2016\/13474<\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2018\/4959<\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 29.06.2018<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;Mahkemece, iddia, savunma, bilirki\u015fi raporu ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re, davac\u0131 ve davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fi ile daval\u0131 &#8230; aras\u0131nda s\u00f6zle\u015fme imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131, &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme kapsam\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131nda i\u015fler yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n &#8230; 9. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2013\/367 esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda s\u00f6zle\u015fme uyar\u0131nca \u00f6dedi\u011fi bir k\u0131s\u0131m paran\u0131n iadesini istedi\u011fi, ortak hesap a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in davac\u0131n\u0131n, daval\u0131 &#8230; ile birlikte daval\u0131 bankaya talimat verdi\u011fi, daval\u0131 banka \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n\u0131n \u0130ngilizce olarak davac\u0131ya hesab\u0131n mahiyetini anlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131, <em><strong>s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi imzalayan davac\u0131n\u0131n belgelerin niteli\u011fini anlamam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 halinde imzalamadan \u00f6nce terc\u00fcmandan yararlanmas\u0131 ya da belgenin \u00e7evirisini istemesi gerekti\u011fi, bu konuda talepte bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fin mahiyetini anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na geldi\u011fi.<\/strong><\/em>..&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em><strong>(Gerek\u00e7enin \u00c7eli\u015fkisiz ve Tatmin Edici Olmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas\u00a0 : 2021\/8877<\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar: 2022\/6026<\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 21.06.2022<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221; Bir mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcnde, taraflar\u0131n iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zetinin, anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 ve anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131 hususlar\u0131n, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli vak\u0131alar hakk\u0131nda toplanan delillerin, delillerin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirilmesinin, sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclen vak\u0131alarla, bunlardan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 ve hukuki sebeplerin birer birer, <em><strong>\u015f\u00fcphe ve teredd\u00fct uyand\u0131rmayacak \u015fekilde<\/strong><\/em> h\u00fck\u00fcmde g\u00f6sterilmesi gereklidir. Bu k\u0131s\u0131m, h\u00fckm\u00fcn gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcd\u00fcr. Gerek\u00e7e, hakimin (mahkemenin) tespit etmi\u015f oldu\u011fu maddi vak\u0131alar ile h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 aras\u0131nda bir k\u00f6pr\u00fc g\u00f6revi yapar. Gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde h\u00fckm\u00fcn dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 hukuki esaslar a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r. Hakim, taraflar\u0131n kendisine sunduklar\u0131 vak\u0131alar\u0131n hukuki niteli\u011fini (hukuk sebepleri) kendili\u011finden (re\u2019sen) ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131p bularak, h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131 ve bunun nedenlerini gerek\u00e7ede a\u00e7\u0131klar. Hakim, gerek\u00e7e sayesinde verdi\u011fi h\u00fckm\u00fcn do\u011fru olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yani kendini denetler. \u00dcst mahkeme de bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn hukuka uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak gerek\u00e7e sayesinde denetleyebilir. Taraflar da ancak gerek\u00e7e sayesinde hakl\u0131 olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 daha iyi anlayabilirler. Bir h\u00fck\u00fcm, ne kadar hakl\u0131 olursa olsun, gerek\u00e7esiz ise taraflar\u0131 doyurmaz <em>(&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.; Medeni Usul Hukuku Ders Kitab\u0131 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019na G\u00f6re Yeniden Yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, 22 Bask\u0131, Ankara 2011, s.472).<\/em> Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 141. maddesi gere\u011fince b\u00fct\u00fcn mahkemelerin her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kararlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7eli olmas\u0131 gereklidir. Gerek\u00e7enin \u00f6nemi, Anayasal olarak h\u00fckme ba\u011flanmakla g\u00f6sterilmi\u015f olup, gerek\u00e7e ve h\u00fck\u00fcm birbirine s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yasan\u0131n arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlamda olu\u015fturulacak kararlar\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kralar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k, anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r, <em><strong>\u00e7eli\u015fkisiz,<\/strong><\/em> uygulanabilir olmas\u0131n\u0131n gereklili\u011fi kadar; karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin de, sonucu ile tam bir uyum i\u00e7inde, o davaya konu maddi olgular\u0131n mahkemece nas\u0131l nitelendirildi\u011fini, kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn hangi nedenlere ve hukuksal d\u00fczenlemelere dayand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koyacak; k\u0131saca, maddi olgular ile h\u00fck\u00fcm aras\u0131ndaki mant\u0131ksal ba\u011flant\u0131y\u0131 g\u00f6sterecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 gerekir. Zira, taraflar\u0131n o dava y\u00f6n\u00fcnden, hukuk d\u00fczenince hangi nedenle hakl\u0131 veya haks\u0131z g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fcklerini anlay\u0131p de\u011ferlendirebilmeleri ve Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n hukuka uygunluk denetimini yapabilmesi i\u00e7in, ortada, usul\u00fcne uygun \u015fekilde olu\u015fturulmu\u015f; h\u00fckm\u00fcn hangi nedenle o i\u00e7erik ve kapsamda verildi\u011fini ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131yla g\u00f6steren, ifadeleri \u00f6zenle se\u00e7ilmi\u015f ve ku\u015fkuya yer vermeyecek a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131ktaki bir gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn ve buna uyumlu h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kralar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nitekim, 07\/06\/1976 tarihli ve 3\/4-3 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde yer alan \u201cGerek\u00e7enin ilgili bilgi ve belgelerin isabetle takdir edildi\u011fini g\u00f6sterir bi\u00e7imde ge\u00e7erli ve yasal olmas\u0131 aranmal\u0131d\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7enin bu niteli\u011fi yasa koyucunun amac\u0131na uygun oldu\u011fu gibi, karar\u0131 ayd\u0131nlatmak, keyfili\u011fi \u00f6nlemek ve <strong><em>taraflar\u0131 tatmin etmek niteli\u011fi<\/em><\/strong> de tart\u0131\u015fma g\u00f6t\u00fcrmez bir ger\u00e7ektir.\u201d \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131klama ile de ayn\u0131 ilkeye vurgu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r&#8230;&#8221;<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>3-) KORKUTMA (\u0130KRAH) :\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>Hukuki i\u015flem, hukuk d\u00fczenince bizzat belirlenen \u015fart ve s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde, ki\u015finin arzu etti\u011fi ama\u00e7lara uygun hukuki sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etti\u011fi irade beyan\u0131d\u0131r. Bu tan\u0131mdan da anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, bir hukuki i\u015flemin temel kurucu unsurudur. Bu nedenle hukuki i\u015flemin ge\u00e7erli ve amac\u0131na uygun bir hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in o hukuki i\u015flemi yapan ki\u015fi veya ki\u015filerin sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde olu\u015fmu\u015f iradelerinin bulunmas\u0131 ve yine bu iradelerinin istenilen hukuki sonuca uygun \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Ancak \u00e7e\u015fitli nedenlerle ki\u015finin i\u015flem iradesi olu\u015fum ya da a\u00e7\u0131klama a\u015famas\u0131nda sakatlanabilir. Bu sakatl\u0131k, iradenin \u00f6zg\u00fcr bir bi\u00e7imde olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 veya ger\u00e7ek iradeye uygun \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131l\u0131rken taraflardan birinin i\u015flem iradesinin olu\u015fum veya beyan\u0131 a\u015famas\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan sakatl\u0131klara irade bozuklu\u011fu denir <em>(Eren, F.: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 22. b., Ankara 2017, s. 392).<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130rade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2lleri m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nda (BK) \u201cR\u0131zadaki fesat\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131nda \u201cHata\u201d, \u201cHile\u201d ve \u201c\u0130krah\u201d olarak 23 ila 31. maddeler aras\u0131nda h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f iken, 01.07.2012 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun (TBK) 30 ila 39. maddeleri aras\u0131nda bu defa \u201cYan\u0131lma\u201d, \u201cAldatma\u201d ve \u201cKorkutma\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">T\u00fcrk hukukunda irade bozuklu\u011funa ba\u011flanan yapt\u0131r\u0131m ise bir\u00a0kesin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck\u00a0(butlan) h\u00e2li de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">M\u00fclga BK\u2019n\u0131n 23 ve devam\u0131 maddelerinde \u201c\u2026ilzam olunamaz.\u201d (BK.23), \u201c\u2026o akit ile ilzam olunmaz.\u201d (BK.28), \u201c\u2026kendi hakk\u0131nda l\u00fczum ifade etmez\u201d (BK.29\/I),\u00a0TBK\u2019nda ise (yeni BK)\u00a0\u201c\u2026 ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaz.\u201d (TBK.30), \u201c\u2026s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir.\u201d (TBK.36 ve 37\/1) \u015feklindeki ibareler kullan\u0131lmak suretiyle irade bozuklu\u011fuyla yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin, iradesi hata, hile veya ikrahla sakatlanan kimseyi ba\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ve bu ki\u015fiye belli bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde kullanabilece\u011fi iptal hakk\u0131 tan\u0131m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ancak kar\u015f\u0131 taraf s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olup, irade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2llerinin yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 tek tarafl\u0131 ba\u011flamazl\u0131kt\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi gibi irade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2lleri, t\u00fcm hukuki i\u015flemler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden olduk\u00e7a \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131makta ve ko\u015fullar\u0131 olu\u015ftu\u011fu takdirde yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin iptal edilmesi sonucunu do\u011furmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Kanunlar\u0131m\u0131zda iradeyi bozan sebepler \u00fc\u00e7 durum olarak h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olup, yan\u0131lma (hata), aldatma (hile) ve\u00a0korkutma (ikrah)\u00a0ger\u00e7ekle\u015fme bi\u00e7imleri bak\u0131m\u0131ndan birbirinden farkl\u0131d\u0131rlar. Ayr\u0131ca irade bozuklu\u011fu sadece s\u00f6zle\u015fmelere \u00f6zg\u00fc bir sakatl\u0131k h\u00e2li olmay\u0131p, tek tarafl\u0131 hukuki i\u015flemler i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Korkutma (ikrah)<\/strong>; bir ki\u015finin yapmak istemedi\u011fi bir hukuki i\u015flemi, yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde kendisinin veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131ndan birinin zarara u\u011frat\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 tehdidiyle yapmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar. B\u00f6yle bir durumda ki\u015finin ger\u00e7ek iradesi ile korkutma sonucunda a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iradesi birbiriyle uyumlu de\u011fildir. Korkutma h\u00e2linde bozukluk iradenin beyan\u0131nda de\u011fil, iradenin olu\u015fumundad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">TBK\u2019n\u0131n 37\/1. (BK m. 29\/1.) maddesine g\u00f6re taraflardan biri, di\u011ferinin veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015finin korkutmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Ancak bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin korkutma ile sakatlanabilmesi, di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla korkutman\u0131n hukuken dikkate al\u0131nabilmesi i\u00e7in baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 aran\u0131r. Bu \u015fartlar, somut olayda iptal istemine konu temlikin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 818 say\u0131l\u0131 BK\u2019n\u0131n \u201c\u0130krah\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan 30. maddesinde; \u201c<em>\u0130krah olunan taraf, hal ve mevkiine nazaran kendisinin yahut yak\u0131n akrabas\u0131ndan birinin hayat veya \u015fah\u0131s veya namus yahut mallar\u0131 a\u011f\u0131r ve derhal vuku bulacak bir tehlikeye maruz oldu\u011funa kanaat getirdi\u011fi takdirde ikrah, muteber addolunur. Bir hakk\u0131n veya kanuni salahiyetin istenece\u011fi ve kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 tehdidi ile m\u00fczayakaya d\u00fc\u00e7ar olan kimsenin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 akit, tehdit eden i\u00e7in fahi\u015f menfaatler temin etmiyorsa; bu tehdit, ikrah\u0131 muteber addolunmaz. Fakat fahi\u015f menfaatler istihsali i\u00e7in tehdit olunan taraf\u0131n m\u00fczayaka halinde bulunmas\u0131ndan istifade olunmu\u015f olursa bu korku nazara al\u0131n\u0131r<\/em>\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenleme alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bu maddeye g\u00f6re\u00a0\u00f6ncelikle di\u011fer taraf\u0131n belirli bir hukuki i\u015flemi yapmas\u0131 i\u00e7in onu korkutmaya y\u00f6nelik bir eylemin bulunmas\u0131\u00a0ve bu eylemin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu eylem, korkutulan ki\u015finin irade ve karar\u0131na etki etme amac\u0131yla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmelidir. Bir hakk\u0131n veya kanundan do\u011fan bir yetkinin kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 tehdidi ile (dava a\u00e7\u0131laca\u011f\u0131, icra takibi yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131, \u015fikayet hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi) s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ise bu hakk\u0131 veya yetkiyi kullanaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klayan\u0131n, di\u011fer taraf\u0131n zor durumda kalmas\u0131ndan a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 bir menfaat sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, korkutman\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilir. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle ki\u015filerin hak ve yetkilerini kanunun \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ama\u00e7 ve s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak, bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda tehdit unsuru olarak k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 engellenmek istenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u0130kinci olarak eylemin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafta esasl\u0131 bir korku uyand\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131<\/strong>, yani kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n kendisine veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131na y\u00f6nelmi\u015f a\u011f\u0131r bir tehlike s\u00f6z konusu olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu tehlike, onlar\u0131n hayat ya da ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olabilece\u011fi gibi namus yahut mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik de olabilir. Belirtilmelidir ki tehdidin y\u00f6neldi\u011fi hayat, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131, namus gibi olgular Kanun\u2019da s\u0131n\u0131rlay\u0131c\u0131 olarak say\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yine tehdit kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n kendisine ya da yak\u0131n akrabalar\u0131ndan birine y\u00f6nelmi\u015f olabilir. Ancak \u201cyak\u0131n akraba\u201d deyiminden ki\u015finin sadece kan ba\u011f\u0131 ile ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu akrabalar\u0131 de\u011fil, kendilerine ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu yak\u0131n \u00e7evresini olu\u015fturan ki\u015filer anla\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Nitekim 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK\u2019n\u0131n 38. maddesinde \u201cyak\u0131n akraba\u201d ibaresi yerine, \u201cyak\u0131nlar\u0131ndan biri\u201d ibaresi kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tehdidin esasl\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise korkutulan ki\u015finin h\u00e2l ve mevkiine yani tehdide maruz kalan ki\u015finin s\u00fcbjektif durumuna (kad\u0131n veya erkek olu\u015fu, ya\u015f\u0131, k\u00fclt\u00fcr\u00fc, yeti\u015fme tarz\u0131, mesle\u011fi, e\u011fitim ve ekonomik durumu vb.) g\u00f6re belirlenmelidir. Bu belirlemenin her somut olay\u0131n kendi \u00f6zelliklerine g\u00f6re yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tehdit eyleminin de\u011fil de ancak Kanun\u2019un arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131ktaki korkutman\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n karar verme serbestisini ortadan kald\u0131rarak iradeyi sakatlayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bunun i\u00e7in de ki\u015finin yap\u0131lan korkutma eylemi sonucunda kendisi veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131ndan birinin zarara u\u011frayaca\u011f\u0131 endi\u015fesini ciddi olarak ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fart ise tehdidin derhal vuku bulacak bir tehlikeye ili\u015fkin olmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong>\u00a0Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla tehlike yak\u0131n olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Kanun, tehlikenin hem a\u011f\u0131r hem de yak\u0131n olmas\u0131n\u0131 aramaktad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmden her tehdidin de\u011fil de sadece \u201ca\u011f\u0131r ve derhal vuku bulacak bir tehlike\u201d olu\u015fturan eylemlerin iptal nedeni olu\u015fturaca\u011f\u0131 sonucu \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. Yak\u0131n tehlike ise tehdit edilen ki\u015fiye tehlikeyi \u00f6nlemek i\u00e7in gerekli tedbirlere ba\u015fvurma imk\u00e2n\u0131 b\u0131rakmayan tehlikedir. Tehlikeyi \u00f6nleme olana\u011f\u0131 mevcut ise yak\u0131n bir tehlikenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsedilemez. Korkutman\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klanan bu ko\u015fullar\u0131 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK\u2019n\u0131n 38\/1. maddesinde; \u201cKorkutulan, i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu durum bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kendisinin veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131ndan birinin ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na ya da malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik a\u011f\u0131r ve yak\u0131n bir zarar tehlikesinin do\u011fdu\u011funa inanmakta hakl\u0131 ise, korkutma ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r\u201d \u015feklinde ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Son \u015fart ise korkutma eylemi ile yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong>\u00a0\u0130lliyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in de korkutman\u0131n, korkutulan ki\u015finin i\u015flem yapma iradesi \u00fczerinde do\u011frudan etki etmesi ve hukuki i\u015flem ya da s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ikrah\u0131n etkisiyle yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir. Sebep sonu\u00e7 ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul i\u00e7in korkutma konusu tehlikenin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fme ihtimalinin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kuruldu\u011fu anda mevcut olup, devam etmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tehlikenin derhal meydana gelecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 laz\u0131md\u0131r. \u00d6yle ki, tehlikeden ka\u00e7mak veya ilgililere ba\u015fvurmak m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Tehdit eden t\u00fcm tehdit vas\u0131talar\u0131na sahip olmal\u0131d\u0131r. <em>(O\u011fuzman Kemal, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmleri, \u0130stanbul 2003, s. 156.)<\/em> M\u00fckrehin ger\u00e7ek bir tehlikenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda \u015f\u00fcphesinin olmamas\u0131 laz\u0131md\u0131r. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc her tehdit korkuyu do\u011furmaz. Korkunun yerinde ve tehdit edilen fiilin objektif olarak korkulmaya uygun olmas\u0131 gereklidir. Cidd\u00eelik objektif olarak de\u011fil, s\u00fcbjektif olarak ikraha maruz kalan kimsenin durumuna g\u00f6re \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fclecektir. <em>(Feyzio\u011flu, I, 171; Saymen\/Elbir, I\/I, 227; Reiso\u011flu, 84.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tehdit ki\u015finin \u015fah\u0131s veya malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelmi\u015f zarar veren ya da zarar verme tehlikesi bulunan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 eylem olarak tan\u0131mlanabilir. Bu say\u0131ma h\u00fcrriyetler, \u00f6zel hayat\u0131n gizlili\u011fi de eklenebilir. \u015eah\u0131s varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tehdit, ki\u015fisel nitelikteki \u015feref, haysiyet, \u00f6zel ya\u015fam, \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckler ve namusa y\u00f6nelmi\u015f tehditleri ifade eder. Mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tehdit ise, ki\u015finin mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na zarar veren ya da zarar verme tehlikesi bulunan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 eylemleri kapsar. \u0130krah a\u00e7\u0131k olabilece\u011fi gibi z\u0131mni (kapal\u0131) da olabilir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Korkutma (ikrah) ile beden \u00fczerinde fiziki kuvvet kullanman\u0131n (zorlaman\u0131n) farkl\u0131 \u015feyler oldu\u011funu da belirtmek gerekir. Zorlama maddi ve manevi olabilir. TBK\u2019n\u0131n 37 ile 38. maddelerinde d\u00fczenlenen korkutma manevi zorlama durumunda s\u00f6z konusu olur. Korkutma, korkutulan\u0131n zihince istenilen \u015fekilde karar vermeye zorlay\u0131p y\u00f6nelten bir eylemdir. Ki\u015finin bedeni \u00fczerinde kullan\u0131lan kuvvet (maddi zor) h\u00e2linde ise ki\u015finin hi\u00e7bir \u015fekilde s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma iradesi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kuruldu\u011fundan s\u00f6z edilemez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Di\u011fer taraftan h\u00e2kim, taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu olan vak\u0131alar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini kural olarak kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131ramaz. Bir olay\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini taraflar ispat etmelidir. Bir davada ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn hangi tarafa ait olaca\u011f\u0131 hususu; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 TMK\u2019n\u0131n 6. maddesinde, \u201cKanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi gibi usul hukukunun en \u00f6nemli konular\u0131ndan biri olan ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kural\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) 190. maddesinde de \u201c\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, kanunda \u00f6zel bir d\u00fczenleme bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, iddia edilen vak\u0131aya ba\u011flanan hukuki sonu\u00e7tan kendi lehine hak \u00e7\u0131karan tarafa aittir\u201d \u015feklinde h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca ispat y\u00fck\u00fc, korkutma (ikrah) nedeniyle iradesinin sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcren davac\u0131 tarafa aittir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n ikrah\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ko\u015fullar kapsam\u0131nda ispat etmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ayr\u0131ca, hata, hile ve ikrah iddialar\u0131n\u0131n senede ba\u011flanmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan senetle ispat edilmesinde maddi imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131k vard\u0131r. Bu nedenle hukuki i\u015flemlerdeki irade bozuklu\u011fu iddialar\u0131, HMK\u2019n\u0131n 203\/1-\u00e7 maddesinde senede kar\u015f\u0131 senetle ispat zorunlulu\u011funun istisnalar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme resm\u00ee senetle yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi TMK\u2019n\u0131n \u201cResm\u00ee belgelerle ispat\u201d kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 7. maddesi \u201cResm\u00ee sicil ve senetler, belgeledikleri olgular\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funa kan\u0131t olu\u015fturur. Bunlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131, kanunlarda ba\u015fka bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, her hangi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, korkutma (ikrah) olgusunun tan\u0131k d\u00e2hil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130kraha maruz kalm\u0131\u015f olan kimse, ikrah ortadan kalkt\u0131ktan sonra, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi feshetmi\u015f olsa bile, u\u011fram\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu menfi zararlar\u0131n\u0131, tehdit edene \u00f6dettirebilir. BK. 31. maddeye g\u00f6re, tehdit edilmi\u015f olan kimse, tel\u00e2fi edilemeyen zararlar\u0131n\u0131 tazmin ettirir. E\u011fer tehdit \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir \u015fah\u0131s taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa, bu \u015fah\u0131s ikraha maruz kalm\u0131\u015f kimsenin bu y\u00fczden u\u011fram\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu zararlar\u0131 da BK. md. 41 ve di\u011ferlerine g\u00f6re \u00f6demek mecburiyetindedir. <em>(Kocayusufpa\u015fao\u011flu, s. 235.)<\/em> Tehdit ile iradesini beyan etmi\u015f bir kimse, sonradan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye icazet verirse, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erli hale gelirse de, bu tehdit ile akdin yerine getirilmesinden dolay\u0131 bir zarara u\u011fram\u0131\u015fsa, zarar\u0131n tazminini tehdit edenden isteyebilir. Zira ikrah, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir fiildir. \u0130kraha maruz kalm\u0131\u015f olan\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye icazet vermesi, bu fiillerin hukuku ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. BK. md. 31;e g\u00f6re, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye icazet vermi\u015f olan kimse, bu y\u00fczden maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 daha az zarar\u0131, tehdit eden kimseden isteyebilir. <em>(O\u011fuzman, s. 127)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>4-) GAB\u0130N (A\u015eIRI YARARLANMA) :<\/strong><\/span> S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131n taraflardan biri di\u011ferinin zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 istismar ederek edimler aras\u0131nda a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 de\u011fer fark\u0131 yaratarak onu s\u00f6m\u00fcrmesine denir. TBK Madde 28\/1: Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 edimler aras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir orans\u0131zl\u0131k varsa, bu orans\u0131zl\u0131k, \u00a0zarar g\u00f6renin zor durumda kalmas\u0131ndan veya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizli\u011finden ya da deneyimsizli\u011finden yararlan\u0131lmak suretiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi takdirde, zarar g\u00f6ren, durumun \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re ya s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 di\u011fer tarafa bildirerek edimin geri verilmesini ya da s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 kalarak edimler aras\u0131ndaki orans\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesini isteyebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gabin\u00a0yani a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanman\u0131n baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131 vard\u0131r. Bunlar\u00a0<em>\u201cobjektif unsurlar\u201d<\/em>\u00a0ve\u00a0<em>\u201cs\u00fcbjektif unsurlar\u201d<\/em>\u00a0olmak \u00fczere ikiye ayr\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Objektif unsur:<\/strong>\u00a0A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanmadan s\u00f6z edebilmek i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile bor\u00e7lan\u0131lan kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 edimlerinin birbirinden a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde farkl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekir. Kanunumuz bu fark\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirlememi\u015ftir. Bu belirlemeyi her hangi bir \u015fekilde belirlememi\u015f veya herhangi bir organa vermemi\u015ftir. Bu fark\u0131n tespitini hakimin takdir yetkisine b\u0131rakm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay kabul\u00fcne g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131k orans\u0131zl\u0131k; edimler aras\u0131nda %50 lik fark olarak kabul edilir. Ola\u011fan ko\u015fullar alt\u0131nda ise bir gabinden bahsedebilmemiz i\u00e7in edimler aras\u0131nda en az %25 fark olmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Yani orant\u0131s\u0131zl\u0131k kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in sat\u0131\u015f bedeli ile piyasa de\u011feri aras\u0131nda %25 lik bir orant\u0131s\u0131zl\u0131k fark\u0131 olmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>S\u00fcbjektif unsur:\u00a0<\/strong>A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanman\u0131n s\u00fcbjektif unsuru zarar g\u00f6ren taraf\u0131n di\u011fer tarafa oranla zay\u0131f durumda bulunmas\u0131 \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlan\u0131r. Zarar g\u00f6renin zay\u0131f durumundan kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n yararlanmas\u0131nda s\u00fcbjektif unsur i\u00e7erisinde de\u011ferlendirilmektedir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bu unsurlarla birlikte zarar verenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6m\u00fcrme kast\u0131nda bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. S\u00f6m\u00fcrme kast\u0131ndan kastedilen konu zarar verenin zarar g\u00f6renin \u00f6zel durumunu bilmesi ve bu durumdan bilerek yararlanmas\u0131d\u0131r<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tugsanyilmaz.av.tr\/genel\/asiri-yararlanma-gabin-ve-unsurlari\">.<\/a> S\u00f6m\u00fcren tarafta s\u00f6m\u00fcrmek kast\u0131 \u015fart olup, ihmale dayal\u0131 bir kast \u015feklinde varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015feklinde beliren kusur a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanma i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir. \u201cZarar g\u00f6ren bu hakk\u0131n\u0131, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik veya deneyimsizli\u011fini \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi; zor durumda kalmada ise, bu durumun ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten ba\u015flayarak \u00a0bir y\u0131l ve her halde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kuruldu\u011fu tarihten ba\u015flayarak be\u015f y\u0131l i\u00e7inde kullanabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulduktan sonra piyasadaki dalgalanmalar sonucunda olu\u015fan edimler aras\u0131ndaki a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 dengesizlik gabin olarak de\u011ferlendirilemez.<em>(CLAUSULA REBUS SIC STANTIBUS) olgusu alt\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilir. (geni\u015f bilgi i\u00e7in bkz. ZEVKLLER, s.172-176)<\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>M\u00fczayaka,<\/strong><\/span> ki\u015finin zor durumda bulunmas\u0131, darda kalmas\u0131 olarak tan\u0131mlanabilir. Ki\u015finin i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu bu halden kurtulabilmek i\u00e7in edimleri aras\u0131nda a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 dengesizlik olan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi kabul etmesi gabin olarak de\u011ferlendirilir. Bu korkunun esasl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmez. Darda kalma, \u015fah\u0131s varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. \u00d6rne\u011fin, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 kanamas\u0131 olan hamile e\u015fini tedavi ettirebilmek i\u00e7in il\u00e7edeki tek hastaneye g\u00f6t\u00fcren bir ki\u015finin yap\u0131lacak tedavinin kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u00e7ok y\u00fcksek bedelli d\u00fczenlenen bonoyu imzalamas\u0131 veya a\u011f\u0131r hastas\u0131 olan ki\u015finin, hastay\u0131 hastaneye yeti\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in helikoptere fahi\u015f bir bedel \u00f6demesi hallerinde \u015fah\u0131s varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tehlikede olmas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fczayaka hali s\u00f6z konusudur. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k borcu nedeniyle icra takibi yap\u0131larak mallar\u0131 haczedilen bir ki\u015finin e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131 hacizden kurtarabilmek i\u00e7in %100 faizle para almas\u0131 halinde mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tehlikede bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fczayaka hali s\u00f6z konusudur. M\u00fczayaka hali, zor duruma d\u00fc\u015fen ki\u015finin bizzat kendi kusurundan kaynaklanabilece\u011fi gibi her hangi bir kusuru olmadan da ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilir. <em>(EREN, s.390)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Hiffet,<\/strong><\/span> hafiflik, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik nedeni ile ki\u015finin edimleri aras\u0131nda a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 dengesizlik bulunan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapmas\u0131d\u0131r. Hiffet ile kastedilen hafiflik, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik ki\u015fide bulunan genel bir duruma ili\u015fkin de\u011fildir. Bir ba\u015fka ifade ile ki\u015finin s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapabilme yetene\u011fi (ay\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc) bak\u0131m\u0131ndan herhangi bir sakatl\u0131k s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir, ki\u015fi hukuksal i\u015flem ehliyetine sahiptir . Ancak somut olayda yeterli bilgiye sahip olmamas\u0131, ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmadan acele karar vermesi, yani s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7in gerekli dikkat ve \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermemesi nedeniyle bu unsur ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015ftir. <em>(KILI\u00c7O\u011eLU, s.124; EREN, s.390) Toyluk; bir \u015fahs\u0131n yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015fleme d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmeden \u00e7abucak karar vermesi sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmemesi ve elindeki mal\u0131n k\u0131ymetini bilmemesi sebebiyle istismara yani aldat\u0131lmaya m\u00fcsait olmas\u0131 demektir. Toyluk i\u015f konusunda eksik kabiliyet sahiplerinde ileriyi g\u00f6r\u00fcp olacaklar\u0131 kestirememe hallerinde ya da ak\u0131l veya zeka y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki (ak\u0131l veya zeka zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131) gerilikte kendini g\u00f6sterir.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tecr\u00fcbesizlik, <\/strong><\/span>kanun koyucunun da a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ifade etti\u011fi gibi, ki\u015finin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme konusunda yeterli tecr\u00fcbeye sahip olamamas\u0131d\u0131r. Hafiflik ile tecr\u00fcbesizlik aras\u0131nda fark vard\u0131r. Hafiflikte gerekli ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmadan ani karar verme s\u00f6z konusu iken tecr\u00fcbesizlikte ki\u015fideki deneyim eksikli\u011fi g\u00f6ze \u00e7arpmaktad\u0131r. Ancak s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin tecr\u00fcbesizlik neticesinde yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 her somut olayda ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. \u00d6rne\u011fin uzun y\u0131llard\u0131r ticaretle u\u011fra\u015fan bir kimsenin emeklili\u011finde kendi ticari faaliyet alan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede tecr\u00fcbesizli\u011fi s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiz olan hakikati g\u00f6rmek istemez; tecr\u00fcbesiz olan ise onu istese de g\u00f6remez.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gabin iddias\u0131nda bulunan ki\u015fi T.T.K. anlam\u0131nda tacir ise, gabinin ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilmesi i\u00e7in varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerekli olan \u00f6zel durumlardan hiffetsizlik ve tecr\u00fcbesizlik hallerinde bu iddias\u0131 dinlenmemektedir. Tacirden beklenen basiretli bir tacir gibi davranma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc\u011f\u00fc tacirin faaliyet g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi alanla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. Yani tacirin faaliyet g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi ticaret dal\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 bir ticaret dal\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmede \u00f6zen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc yoktur.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gabinin objektif unsuru incelenirken ise s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131ndan sonra edimlerin de\u011ferlerinde meydana gelen de\u011fi\u015fiklikler g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131namayaca\u011f\u0131 gibi, bir taraf\u0131n edime verdi\u011fi s\u00fcbjektif de\u011fer de dikkate al\u0131namaz<i>\u00a0<\/i><em>(Yarg\u0131tay Onursal Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Eraslan \u00d6ZKAYA, A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 Yararlanma (Gabin) Davalar\u0131, 4.Bask\u0131, Ankara 2020, s.32-33 ; Prof.Dr.M. Kemal O\u011eUZMAN \u2013 Prof.Dr.Turgut \u00d6Z, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler Cilt-1, 19.Bas\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2021, s.142).<\/em>\u00a0Yani edim ve kar\u015f\u0131 edim aras\u0131ndaki <strong>a\u00e7\u0131k orans\u0131zl\u0131k, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 zaman ve yerdeki piyasa pazar, arz ve talep \u015fartlar\u0131na g\u00f6re mevcut olmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong> <strong>Sonraki orans\u0131zl\u0131k a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yaralanman\u0131n bu unsurunu olu\u015fturamaz<\/strong><i>\u00a0<\/i><em>(Prof.Dr.Fikret EREN, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 14.Bask\u0131, Ankara 2012, s.418-419 ; Prof.Dr.M. Kemal O\u011eUZMAN \u2013 Prof.Dr.Turgut \u00d6Z, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler Cilt-1, 19.Bas\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2021, s.142 ; Prof.Dr.Mustafa Alper G\u00dcM\u00dc\u015e, Bor\u00e7lar Hukukunun Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmleri, 1.Bask\u0131, Ankara 2021, s,364)<\/em>.Gabinin subjektif unsuru olan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik ve deneyimsizlik ko\u015fulunun bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131rken ise, taraflar\u0131n k\u00fclt\u00fcrel, e\u011fitim ve sosyal konumlar\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fitimli, bu konularda deneyimli bir ki\u015finin s\u00f6m\u00fcr\u00fclmesi iddias\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131rken, e\u011fitimsiz ve deneyimsiz ki\u015filere nazaran daha s\u0131k\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir.<i>\u00a0<\/i><em>(Prof.Dr.Ahmet M. KILI\u00c7O\u011eLU, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, s.218 ; Yarg\u0131tay Onursal Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Eraslan \u00d6ZKAYA, A\u015f\u0131r\u0131 Yararlanma (Gabin) Davalar\u0131, s.39-41).<\/em>\u00a0Burada s\u00f6m\u00fcren tarafta s\u00f6m\u00fcrme kast\u0131 \u015fart olup\u00a0<u>ihmal \u015feklinde beliren kusur, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanma i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir.<\/u> S\u00f6m\u00fcr\u00fc kast\u0131, s\u00f6m\u00fcrende hem kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n zor, zay\u0131f durumunu bilme, hem de bundan yararlanma iste\u011fini gerektirir. S\u00f6m\u00fcrende bilme ve isteme unsurlar\u0131ndan biri mevcut de\u011filse, s\u00f6m\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmez.<i>\u00a0<\/i><em>(Prof.Dr.Fikret EREN, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, s.421 ; Prof.Dr.M. Kemal O\u011eUZMAN \u2013 Prof.Dr.Turgut \u00d6Z, Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler Cilt-1, s.143 ; Prof.Dr.Mustafa Alper G\u00dcM\u00dc\u015e, Bor\u00e7lar Hukukunun Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmleri, s.369-370).<\/em><\/li>\n<li>Ba\u011f\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 edim s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan gabin iddias\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>5-) \u0130NAN\u00c7 S\u00d6ZLE\u015eMES\u0130 :\u00a0 <\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">\u0130nananla inan\u0131lan aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan, onlar\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 belirleyen, inan\u00e7l\u0131 muamelenin sona erme sebeplerini ve devredilen hakk\u0131n, inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan inanana geri verme (iade) \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren bor\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir muameledir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme, taraflar\u0131n\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kapsayan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir akit olup, alacak ve m\u00fclkiyetin naklinin hukuk\u00ee sebebini te\u015fkil eder. Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere T\u00fcrk Hukukunda inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemleri do\u011frudan d\u00fczenleyen bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak uygulama ve \u00f6\u011fretide, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 26. (m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 19.) maddesinde yer alan \u201cs\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc\u201d ilkesi kapsam\u0131nda inan\u00e7l\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin d\u00fczenlenebilece\u011fi ve ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi kabul edilmektedir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemlerde inanan ve inan\u0131lan taraf, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin konusunun m\u00fclkiyetinin \u00f6nce inan\u0131lana ge\u00e7mesi; ard\u0131ndan inanana geri d\u00f6nmesi hususunda anla\u015f\u0131rlar. Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 17.05.2000 tarih ve 2000\/2-888 E., 2000\/885 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi gibi inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemler, bir kimsenin menfaatinin ba\u015fkas\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan korunmas\u0131 veya teminat sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla ona baz\u0131 haklar\u0131 ciddi olarak devretti\u011fi, ancak haklar\u0131 iktisap edenin bunlardan do\u011fan baz\u0131 yetkileri hi\u00e7 kullanmamas\u0131, baz\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 da ancak \u00f6nceden hak ve halen menfaat sahibi olan\u0131n g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi bi\u00e7imde kullanmak zorunda olmas\u0131 hususunda taraflar\u0131n anla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemlerdir. G\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi \u00fczere inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem g\u00fcven esas\u0131na dayanan bir hukuk\u00ee i\u015flemdir. Taraflar birbirlerine duyduklar\u0131 g\u00fcven sonucu bir mal\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131na ge\u00e7irir ve daha sonras\u0131nda bu mal\u0131n kendisine geri d\u00f6nece\u011fine g\u00fcvenir. Hatta inanan, mal\u0131n kendisine d\u00f6nece\u011fine g\u00fcvenen ki\u015fi olarak tan\u0131mlan\u0131r.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin taraflar\u0131n\u0131, inanan ve inan\u0131lan olu\u015fturur. Bir hakk\u0131 ya da nesneyi, g\u00fcvendi\u011fi bir ki\u015fiye inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak devreden kimseye \u201cinanan\u201d ad\u0131 verilir. Devredilen hak veya nesneyi, kendisine ait bir hak olarak kendi yarar\u0131na, do\u011frudan do\u011fruya ve dolayl\u0131 olarak kullanan ki\u015fiye de \u201cinan\u0131lan\u201d denir. \u0130nanan\u0131n, inan\u0131lana inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak kazand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hak ya da nesne ise \u201cinan\u00e7 konusu \u015fey\u201d olarak nitelenir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 bir i\u015flemde, kazand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 i\u015flemin taraflar\u0131 ile bor\u00e7 do\u011furan anla\u015fman\u0131n taraflar\u0131 ayn\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemde inan\u0131lan, hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131rken kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan ko\u015fullara uymay\u0131, ama\u00e7 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fince veya s\u00fcre dolunca hak veya nesneyi tekrar inanana (veya onun g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye) devretmeyi y\u00fcklenmektedir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem, kazand\u0131rmay\u0131 yapan ki\u015fiye yani inanana belirli \u015fartlar ger\u00e7ekle\u015fince, kazand\u0131rman\u0131n iadesini isteme hakk\u0131 sa\u011flayan bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmedir. Bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yerine getirilmemesi h\u00e2linde bunun dava yoluyla h\u00fckmen yerine getirilmesi istenebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taraflar b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 i\u015flemle genellikle, teminat te\u015fkil etmek ve iade edilmek \u00fczere mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na d\u00e2hil bir \u015fey veya hakk\u0131, ayn\u0131 amac\u0131 g\u00fcden ola\u011fan hukuk\u00ee muamelelerden daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir hukuk\u00ee durum yaratarak, inan\u0131lana inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak kazand\u0131rmak i\u00e7in ba\u015fvururlar. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, bu i\u015flemle bor\u00e7lu, alacakl\u0131s\u0131na mal\u0131n\u0131 rehin edecek yani yaln\u0131zca s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayni bir hak tan\u0131yacak yerde, mal\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini ge\u00e7irerek rehin hakk\u0131ndan daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc, daha ileri giden bir hak tan\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 temlikin, de\u011finilen bu \u00f6zellikleri nedeniyle, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile satan kimsenin art\u0131k sadece, \u00f6d\u00fcn\u00e7 alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu paray\u0131 geri vererek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 kendisine temlik edilmesini istemek yolunda bir alacak hakk\u0131; ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile alan kimsenin ise borcun \u00f6denmesi g\u00fcn\u00fcne kadar ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 ba\u015fkas\u0131na satmamak ve bor\u00e7 \u00f6denince de geri vermek yolunda yaln\u0131zca bir borcu kalm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Di\u011fer bir bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131yla ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyeti inan\u0131lana (alacakl\u0131ya) ge\u00e7mi\u015ftir. Ta\u015f\u0131nmazda inanarak satan\u0131n (bor\u00e7lu) m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, al\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n bu m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 \u00fczerinde kurulmu\u015f olan bir rehin hakk\u0131ndan da s\u00f6z edilemez. \u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri, taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 iradelerine uygun bulundu\u011fu i\u00e7in, onlara kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 bor\u00e7 y\u00fckleyen ve alacak hakk\u0131 veren ge\u00e7erli s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerdir. (6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 97. maddesi) An\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde, taraflar, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kendilerine y\u00fckledi\u011fi hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131 belirlerken, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin sona erme sebeplerini; devredilen hakk\u0131n inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan inanana iade \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131, bu arada tabii ki s\u00fcresini de belirleyebilirler. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, akde ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na da s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde yer verebilirler. Buna dair akit h\u00fck\u00fcmleri de 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunun 26 ve 27. (818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunun 19 ve 20.) maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil etmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece ge\u00e7erli say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ancak, T\u00fcrk hukukunda ta\u015f\u0131nmazlara ili\u015fkin tasarruf i\u015flemleri tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerinde resm\u00ee \u015fekilde yap\u0131labilmektedir. Bu nedenle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetinin nakli tapuda inan\u00e7l\u0131 temlik yoluyla yap\u0131lamamaktad\u0131r. Bu durum da ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n inan\u00e7l\u0131 devrinin muvazaa ile kar\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na neden olmakta ve pek \u00e7ok sak\u0131ncay\u0131 beraberinde getirmektedir. Hak sahipleri, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak devretmek istemelerine ra\u011fmen tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerinin bu i\u015flemi yapamamas\u0131 nedeniyle taraflar tapuda i\u015flemi genellikle sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi \u015feklinde yapmakta, ger\u00e7ek iradelerini yans\u0131tan ve gizli i\u015flem olarak g\u00f6z\u00fcken inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ise \u015fekil \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesiyle devri m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bu nedenle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallar ya da \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 akitlerde, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin ne gibi hukuk\u00ee sonu\u00e7 do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131 ve s\u00f6zle\u015fmede \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ko\u015fullar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi h\u00e2linde, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetinin naklinin sebebini olu\u015fturup olu\u015fturmayaca\u011f\u0131 \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131makta olup, 05.02.1947 tarihli ve 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda eski hukuka g\u00f6re m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ve ge\u00e7erli olan muvazaa ve nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear iddialar\u0131n\u0131n, Medeni Kanun\u2019un y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden sonra ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallar hakk\u0131nda dinlenip dinlenemeyece\u011fi tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An\u0131lan kararda; \u00e7e\u015fitli sebep ve ama\u00e7larla bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kayd\u0131na ger\u00e7ek malik yerine ba\u015fka bir nam ve bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede akitlerden biri yerine \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir \u015fahs\u0131n g\u00f6sterilmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu, bu gibi h\u00e2llerde vekilin kendi nam\u0131na ve m\u00fcvekkili hesab\u0131na yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tasarruflarda oldu\u011fu gibi hukuki bir durum veya herhangi bir maksatla \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131slardan ger\u00e7e\u011fi gizleme gayesi g\u00fcd\u00fclebilece\u011fi, \u201ck\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli ve haks\u0131z gizlemeler\u201d d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, belirtilen olas\u0131l\u0131klara g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131lacak bir davan\u0131n, ger\u00e7ekten, ya mevcut bir hakka dayanarak bir el de\u011fi\u015ftirme veya bir hakk\u0131n korunmas\u0131 niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131; bu durumun da, temsil ve vek\u00e2let ili\u015fkisinde, m\u00fclkiyette halefiyet esas\u0131 olarak kabul edilmi\u015f bir husus olup, halefiyeti d\u00fczeltme amac\u0131yla \u00f6ncelikle m\u00fclkiyetin vekile aidiyeti d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclse bile, temsil h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan bunun korunmas\u0131 ve devam\u0131na h\u00fckmolunamayaca\u011f\u0131, zira Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun \u201cm\u00fcvekkil vekiline kar\u015f\u0131 muhtelif bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 ifa edince vekilin kendi nam\u0131na ve m\u00fcvekkili hesab\u0131na \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131staki alaca\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcvekkilin olur\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi do\u011frulad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6te yandan gerek ta\u015f\u0131n\u0131r, gerek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallara ili\u015fkin olsun nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear hadiselerinde, meselenin bir istihkak ve m\u00fclkiyet davas\u0131 niteli\u011fini ge\u00e7emeyece\u011finden, ne resm\u00ee senet, ne de \u015fekil meselesinin bahse konu olamayaca\u011f\u0131, meselenin akitte ve isimde muvazaay\u0131 kapsam\u0131na alan Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 18. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmesinin kanunun amac\u0131na uygun d\u00fc\u015fece\u011fine, de\u011finildikten sonra sonu\u00e7ta, nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear davalar\u0131n\u0131n dinlenebilir ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funa h\u00fckmolunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n konular\u0131yla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131, gerek\u00e7eleri ile yol g\u00f6sterici ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131yla ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bulundu\u011fu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. Belirtilen \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda da de\u011finildi\u011fi \u00fczere; inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri bir yandan m\u00fclkiyeti nakil borcu do\u011furmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan taraflar\u0131 ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131, di\u011fer yandan, m\u00fclkiyetin naklinin sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan tasarruf i\u015flemlerini b\u00fcnyesinde bar\u0131nd\u0131ran s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerdir. Bu durumda ko\u015fullar\u0131n olu\u015fmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetini nakil \u00f6zelli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n sonu\u00e7 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi olarak an\u0131lan belgenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye taraf olanlar\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7ermesi yeterli g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olup, hi\u00e7bir yerinde inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 belgenin, en ge\u00e7 i\u015flem tarihinde veya daha \u00f6nceki bir tarihte d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi hususu tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi de\u011finilen bu konuda en ufak bir a\u00e7\u0131klamada dahi bulunulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir kabul, \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi anlam\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131ndan, bu durum hukuk d\u00fczeni taraf\u0131ndan kabul edilemez.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bu nedenle, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 iddialar\u0131n \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan, taraflar\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan yaz\u0131l\u0131 belge ile kan\u0131tlanabilece\u011fi, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015fleme konu belgenin, akit tarihinden \u00f6nce ya da sonra d\u00fczenlenmesinin sonuca etkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucudur. S\u00f6z\u00fc edilen karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 belgenin akitten \u00f6nce veya sonra d\u00fczenlenmesi gerekti\u011fine; di\u011fer bir deyi\u015fle akitten sonraki tarihi ta\u015f\u0131yan belgenin ge\u00e7erli olamayaca\u011f\u0131na dair bir ifade ya da h\u00fck\u00fcm yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi sonu\u00e7 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde yaln\u0131zca \u201cnam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear davalar\u0131n\u0131n mesmu ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131n\u0131n caiz oldu\u011funa\u201d h\u00fckmedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finde yer almayan belgenin akit tarihinden \u00f6nce d\u00fczenlenmesi gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki bir ek ko\u015fulun yorum yolu ile de olsa karar kapsam\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nitekim Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 14.07.2010 tarih ve 2010\/14-394 E., 2010\/395 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 hususlar vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi \u00fczere tapulu bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemle temlikinde, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin yaz\u0131l\u0131 bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekli ve yeterli olup, yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015feklin bir ispat ko\u015fulu oldu\u011fu 05.02.1947 tarih, 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n gere\u011fidir. Ancak inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin yaz\u0131l\u0131 delilini olu\u015fturan inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem nedeniyle iade, tazminat veya s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshini isteyen taraf\u0131n 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) 6. ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) 190\/1. maddesindeki genel h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca ispat etmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Uygulamada, a\u00e7\u0131klanan nitelikte bir yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil bulunmasa bile yanlar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc kan\u0131tlamaya yeterli say\u0131lmamakla beraber bunun vukuuna delalet edecek kar\u015f\u0131 taraf elinden \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 niteli\u011finde bir belge varsa, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin \u201ctan\u0131k\u201d d\u00e2hil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille kan\u0131tlanabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir (Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 28.12.2005 tarihli ve 2005\/14-677 E., 2005\/774 K.; 14.11.2019 tarihli ve 2017\/1-1254 E., 2019\/1197 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131). Yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil veya delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 yoksa inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ikrar (HMK m.188) ve yemin (HMK m. 225 vd) gibi kesin delillerle de ispat edilmesi olanakl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemler ile yap\u0131lan temlikler ge\u00e7erli olup m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ge\u00e7mektedir. Bu itibarla inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda davac\u0131 yolsuz tescile, ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla ayn\u0131 hakka de\u011fil inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden kaynaklanan ki\u015fisel hakka dayanmaktad\u0131r. O halde davan\u0131n konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz olsa dahi bu dava ayni hakk\u0131 koruyan bir dava say\u0131lmaz. Davada, inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki ki\u015fisel hakka dayan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015fleme dayanan davalar\u0131n da zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi olmas\u0131 gerekir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemler gibi, bu i\u015flemlerin hangi zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi tutulacaklar\u0131 da Kanunumuzda d\u00fczenlenmemi\u015ftir. Gerek bilimsel alanda gerekse uygulamada, inan\u00e7 konusunun iadesine, inan\u00e7 konusu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye devredilmi\u015f, inan\u0131lan elinden \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015fsa tazminat talebine ili\u015fkin dava hakk\u0131n\u0131n Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 125. maddesindeki\u00a010 y\u0131ll\u0131k zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na\u00a0tabi oldu\u011fu ortakla\u015fa kabul edilmektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihte, ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla inan\u00e7 konusu \u015feyin iadesi gerekti\u011fi tarihte i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. \u0130ade tarihi hen\u00fcz gelmemi\u015f inan\u0131lan, inan\u00e7 konusunu elinde tutmakta hakl\u0131 ise zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131na imkan yoktur.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><div class=\"alert alert_warning\"><div class=\"alert_icon\"><svg viewBox=\"0 0 28 28\"><defs><style>.path{fill:none;stroke:#000;stroke-miterlimit:10;stroke-width:1.5px;}<\/style><\/defs><g><circle class=\"path\" cx=\"14\" cy=\"14\" r=\"12\"\/><line class=\"path\" x1=\"11.5\" y1=\"17.25\" x2=\"16.5\" y2=\"17.25\"\/><path class=\"path\" d=\"M16.46,17.8A3.94,3.94,0,0,1,17.64,15a4.61,4.61,0,0,0-.12-6.65A5.09,5.09,0,0,0,14,7h0A5.14,5.14,0,0,0,10.5,8.36,4.66,4.66,0,0,0,9,11.63a4.6,4.6,0,0,0,1.4,3.43,3.85,3.85,0,0,1,1.14,2.74h0V19c0,.87.59,2,1.67,2h1.58c1.08,0,1.67-1.16,1.67-2Z\"\/><\/g><\/svg><\/div><div class=\"alert_wrapper\"><\/div><a href=\"#\" class=\"close mfn-close-icon\"><span class=\"icon\">\u2715<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>\u00d6NEML\u0130 ! <\/strong><\/span>\u0130\u00e7tihat de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fi yeniden yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 gerektirmez. Bu nedenle <strong>konu irdelenirken y\u00fcksek mahkemenin <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">G\u00dcNCEL<\/span> i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulmas\u0131,<\/strong> bir\u00e7ok hususta Y\u00fcksek Mahkemenin \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131k \u015fekilde d\u00f6nd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne dikkat edilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY \u0130\u00c7T\u0130HATLARI :\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, 05.02.1947 tarihli ve 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca ancak, yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille kan\u0131tlanabilir. Bu yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil, taraflar\u0131n getirecekleri ve onlar\u0131n imzalar\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan bir belge olmal\u0131d\u0131r. A\u00e7\u0131klanan nitelikte bir yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil bulunmasa da, taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc kan\u0131tlamaya yeterli say\u0131lmamakla beraber bunun vukuuna delalet edecek kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n elinden \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f (inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan el ile yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f fakat imzalanmam\u0131\u015f olan bir senet veya mektup, daktilo veya bilgisayarla yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla birlikte inan\u0131lan\u0131n paraf\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan belge, usul\u00fcne uygun onanmam\u0131\u015f parmak izli veya m\u00fch\u00fcrl\u00fc senetler gibi) \u201cdelil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131\u201d niteli\u011finde bir belge varsa 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 202.maddesi uyar\u0131nca inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi \u201ctan\u0131k\u201d dahil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilir. Yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil veya \u201cdelil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131\u201d yoksa inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ikrar (HMK m.188) yemin (HMK m.225 vd) gibi kesin delillerle de ispat edilmesi olanakl\u0131d\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n yemin deliline dayanmas\u0131 halinde hakimin davac\u0131ya bu hakk\u0131n\u0131 hat\u0131rlatmas\u0131 gerekir. <em>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 09.12.2015 tarihli, 2014\/14-516 Esas, 2015\/2838 say\u0131l\u0131 Karar\u0131 )<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131 daval\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 asl\u0131nda\u00a0 bak\u0131m aktiyle devredece\u011fi iddias\u0131yla sadece iptal davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130ptal tescili kapsamaz. Davac\u0131ya tescil davas\u0131 a\u00e7mas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6nel verilmesi, a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde iki davan\u0131n birle\u015ftirilmesi bundan sonra hata-hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir.<em> (Y.1.HD.31.03.2009 T.507 E.4135 K.)<\/em><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, inananla inan\u0131lan aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan, onlar\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 belirleyen, inan\u00e7l\u0131 muamelenin sona erme sebeplerini ve devredilen hakk\u0131n, inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan inanana geri verme (iade) \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren bor\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir muameledir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme, taraflar\u0131n\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kapsayan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir akit olup, alacak ve m\u00fclkiyetin naklinin hukuki sebebini te\u015fkil eder. Taraflar b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 i\u015flemle genellikle, teminat te\u015fkil etmek ve iade edilmek \u00fczere, mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na dahil bir \u015fey veya hakk\u0131, ayn\u0131 amac\u0131 g\u00fcden ola\u011fan hukuki muamelelerden daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir hukuki durum yaratarak, inan\u0131lana inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak kazand\u0131rmak i\u00e7in ba\u015fvururlar. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, bu i\u015flemle bor\u00e7lu, alacakl\u0131s\u0131na mal\u0131n\u0131 rehin edecek, yani yaln\u0131zca s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayni bir hak tan\u0131yacak yerde, mal\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini ge\u00e7irerek rehin hakk\u0131ndan daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc, daha ileri giden bir hak tan\u0131r. \u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri, taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 iradelerine uygun bulundu\u011fu i\u00e7in, onlara kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 bor\u00e7 y\u00fckleyen ve alacak hakk\u0131 veren ge\u00e7erli s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerdir. An\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde, taraflar, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kendilerine y\u00fckledi\u011fi hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131 belirlerken, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin sona erme sebeplerini; devredilen hakk\u0131n inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan inanana iade \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131, bu arada tabii ki s\u00fcresini de belirleyebilirler. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, akde ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na da s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde yer verebilirler. Buna dair akit h\u00fck\u00fcmleri de TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 26 ve 27. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil etmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece ge\u00e7erli say\u0131l\u0131r. Uygulamada mesele, 05.02.1947 tarihli ve 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 ile ili\u015fkilendirilip, bu karar dayanak yap\u0131lmak suretiyle \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme gidilmektedir. \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n sonu\u00e7 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde ifade olundu\u011fu \u00fczere, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015fleme dayal\u0131 olup dinlenilirli\u011fi kabul edilen iddialar\u0131n ispat\u0131, \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan yaz\u0131l\u0131 delildir. \u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan bu belgenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye taraf olanlar\u0131n veya inan\u0131lan\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7ermesi gereklidir. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir kabul, hem \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi, hem de ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n tapu d\u0131\u015f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131na olanak sa\u011flamak anlam\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131ndan kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerle ba\u011fda\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lamaz. 02.1947 tarihli 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015fleme dayal\u0131 iddian\u0131n, \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 gerekece\u011fi ku\u015fkusuzdur. \u015eayet, ispat k\u00fclfeti kendisinde olan taraf\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir belgesi yok ise ancak taraflar aras\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen mektup, banka dekontu, yaz\u0131\u015fmalar gibi birtak\u0131m belgeler var ise bunlar\u0131n delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 ve iddian\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131n\u0131n olanakl\u0131 hale gelece\u011fi sabittir. \u015eayet, delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131lacak b\u00f6ylesi bir olgu da bulunmuyor ise iddia sahibinin son ba\u015fvuraca\u011f\u0131 delilin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa yemin teklif etme hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu da \u015f\u00fcphesizdir. 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun (TBK) 97. maddesinde, \u201cKar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 bor\u00e7 y\u00fckleyen bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifas\u0131 isteminde bulunan taraf\u0131n, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ko\u015fullar\u0131na ve \u00f6zelliklerine g\u00f6re daha sonra ifa etme hakk\u0131 olmad\u0131k\u00e7a, kendi borcunu ifa etmi\u015f ya da ifas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nermi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir.\u201d d\u00fczenlemesi yer almaktad\u0131r. Mahkemece bozma ilam\u0131na uyularak yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu husus, taraflarca temyiz konusu da yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan art\u0131k inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda taraflar aras\u0131nda ihtilaf bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Somut olayda, \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken husus, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem gere\u011fince davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n iadesini isteyebilmesi i\u00e7in taraflar aras\u0131ndaki alacak-bor\u00e7 miktar\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndedir. Ne var ki, <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>mahkemece alacak-bor\u00e7 miktar\u0131 konusunda iddia ve savunma do\u011frultusunda h\u00fckme yeterli bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme yap\u0131lmadan, sadece yukar\u0131da an\u0131lan icra dosyas\u0131nda kapak hesab\u0131 yapt\u0131r\u0131larak tespit edilen 118.679,55 TL y\u00f6n\u00fcnden depo karar\u0131 verilmek suretiyle sonuca gidilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/strong><\/span> Hal b\u00f6yle olunca; <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">iddia, savunma, icra dosyas\u0131 ve taraflar\u0131n bildirdikleri delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi, taraflar aras\u0131ndaki alacak-bor\u00e7 miktar\u0131 konusunda bilirki\u015fi raporu al\u0131nmas\u0131, b\u00f6ylece T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunun 97. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince bor\u00e7 miktar\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilmesi, ondan sonra belirlenen miktar\u0131 depo etmesi i\u00e7in davac\u0131ya s\u00fcre verilmesi, yat\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde tapu iptal ve tescil iste\u011finin kabul edilmesi, aksi halde davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken<\/span>,<\/strong> icra dosyas\u0131ndaki kapak hesab\u0131na g\u00f6re depo karar\u0131 verilerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.&#8221; <strong>Yarg. 1.HD. 2022\/154 E.2022\/6958 K.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">1. HD.15.12.2015 T.16251\/14619 E. Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda <strong>Basit bir Ara\u015ft\u0131rma ile \u00d6\u011frenilebilecek<\/strong> hususlar\u0131n hile te\u015fkil edemeyece\u011fi, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda yeterli olamayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. \u00d6rne\u011fin \u00d6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma vaadiyle yap\u0131lan devirlerde ise resmi akit esnas\u0131nda aldat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesine olanak olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu durumu bilmesinin de hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ters oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 ile ispat edilece\u011fi belirtmi\u015ftir.1.HD.09.09.2019 T.11825\/4470 E<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Akit s\u0131ras\u0131nda olmay\u0131p, sonradan zuhur eden olaylar\u0131n aktin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine etkisi olamayaca\u011f\u0131-Davac\u0131n\u0131n, temliki i\u015flemin yan edimlerinde eksiklik oldu\u011funu iddia etti\u011fi, ancak davac\u0131n\u0131n serbest iradesiyle yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu temlikten sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen, iradeyi bozan olaylar\u0131n aktin s\u0131hhatini etkilemeyece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilerek, hile hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil iste\u011fine ili\u015fkin davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi,&#8230;1.HD.05.04.2016 T.836\/4088<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131, her ne kadar hileye d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131 devretti\u011fini iddia etmi\u015f ise de, davac\u0131n\u0131n, daval\u0131lar\u0131n da aralar\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu \u015fah\u0131slar hakk\u0131nda Mersin Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu \u015fikayet dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle, <strong>bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131 sebebi ile ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131 FORMAL\u0130TEDEN<\/strong>, hi\u00e7 bir bedel almadan, \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi \u015fahsa devretti\u011fini beyan etti\u011finden davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kab\u00fcl\u00fcne olanak olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8230; 1.HD.20.10.2015 T.4347\/12148<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mahkeme d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ikrar di\u011fer delillerle do\u011frulanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece\u00a0 bu ikrara itibar edilemez.(HGK.23.06.1999,13-533 E.533 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131n\u0131n kendi serbest iradesiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 temlikten sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen iradeyi bozan olaylar\u0131n aktin s\u0131hhatini etkilemeyece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmelidir.(Y.1.HD.05.04.2016,836 E.4088 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131ndan beri intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131 uhdesinde b\u0131rakarak \u00e7\u0131plak m\u00fclkiyeti sat\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde temlik etti\u011fini bildi\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davada hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7ti\u011fi tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. (Y.1.HD.18.09.2013 9292 E.12899 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemin anlam ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kavrayabilecek konumdad\u0131r. Hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemez. Davac\u0131n\u0131n o\u011flu, iste\u011fi \u00fczerine temlikin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 davac\u0131 babas\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131lardan kira istedi\u011fini daval\u0131lar\u0131n vermemesi \u00fczerine eldeki davan\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131 astsubay emeklisi olup yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemlerin anlam ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kavrayabilecek konumdad\u0131r. Nitekim ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n \u00e7\u0131plak m\u00fclkiyetini temlik etmesi de ne kadar bilin\u00e7li oldu\u011funun g\u00f6stergesidir. Bu durumda hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z etme olana\u011f\u0131 yoktur. (Y.1.HD.23.01.2008, 11063 E.611 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131n\u0131n hileye d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kan\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f de\u011fildir. (Y.1.HD.31.03.2005,2712 E.3965 K)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Olayda hile de\u011fil ahlaka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir maksat i\u00e7in verilmi\u015f bir para s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011fundan verilen \u015fey geri al\u0131namaz.(Y.13.HD.22.04.1999,2533 E.3220 K)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Vekaletin hile al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131 k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131 da i\u00e7erir.(Y.1.HD.03.02.1999,350 E.629 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131 temliki sa\u011flayan vekaletnamenin kendisine okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 veya de\u011fi\u015fik \u015fekilde okundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek sahteli\u011fini iddia etmedik\u00e7e, hata ve hileye d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden s\u00f6z ederek tan\u0131k dinletemez. (1.HD.22.10.1987, 6593 E.9335 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hata-Hile-Korkutma, Gabin ve \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 \u0130\u015fleme dayal\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda ispat y\u00fck\u00fc, davac\u0131 yandad\u0131r. Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7ti\u011fine dair iddian\u0131n ispat y\u00fck\u00fc ise daval\u0131 taraftad\u0131r. Semenin \u00f6dendi\u011fini ve s\u00f6zle\u015fme konusu \u015feyin ge\u00e7erli bir devir gerek\u00e7esinin oldu\u011funun ispat\u0131 daval\u0131 yandad\u0131r. Semenin \u00f6denmesi hususunda kural olarak yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil aranmaktad\u0131r.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hata , hile ve korkutma hallerinde \u00f6ncelikle hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7ip ge\u00e7medi\u011fi irdelenmeli, davan\u0131n s\u00fcresinde a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilerek yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. (Y.1.HD.2018\/1943 E.2020\/3295)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Korkutma halinde 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre, korkunun kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren ba\u015flar.(Y.1.HD.2015\/16905 E.,2019\/389 K.) Korkutman\u0131n daval\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k olarak yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 ceza davas\u0131n\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re mahkumiyet kararlar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesi sonucu ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8230;(Y.1.HD.2018\/1002 E.2020\/3284 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gabin davas\u0131nda <strong>\u00d6NCEL\u0130KLE<\/strong> edimler aras\u0131ndaki a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 orans\u0131zl\u0131k \u00fczerinde durulmal\u0131, objektif unsur ispatland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde, subjektif unsurlar\u0131n var olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ara\u015ft\u0131rma cihetine gidilmelidir.(1.HD.2017\/2638 E.2020\/4570 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Itt\u0131la (\u00d6\u011frenme) tarihi, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin akdedildi\u011fi zaman da olabilir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131ndan itibaren i\u015flem i\u00e7eri\u011fine muvaf\u0131k olup serbest iradesiyle i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde, \u00f6\u011frenme zaman\u0131; s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin akdedildi\u011fi tarihtir. (Y.1.H.D.10.05.2016 T,2014\/17235 E.,2016\/5813 K.)<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dava hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa bile, daval\u0131n\u0131n davay\u0131 kabul etmesi halinde mahkemece hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcreyi kendili\u011finden g\u00f6zeterek davan\u0131n bu nedenle reddine karar verilemez. (Y.1.HD.27.09.2018 T,2015\/15852 E.,2018\/12928 K.) Mahkeme hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7ip ge\u00e7medi\u011fini taraflar ileri s\u00fcrmese bile resen g\u00f6zetmeli bu konuda resen ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve soru\u015fturma cihetine gitmelidir.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil davalar\u0131 TBK md.146 maddesi gere\u011fince 10 y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcreye tabidir. S\u00fcrenin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 da ifa imkan\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen iade bor\u00e7lusunun ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapusunun veya s\u00f6zle\u015fme konusu \u015feyin kendisine verilece\u011fi \u00fcmit ve inanc\u0131n sona erdi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flar, iade bor\u00e7lusunun buna yana\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 ile dava hakk\u0131 do\u011far. Bu hakk\u0131n do\u011fdu\u011fu tarihten 10 y\u0131l i\u00e7erisinde davan\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davadan feragatinde r\u0131za fesad\u0131yla malul oldu\u011fu iddia edilebilir.(Y.HGK.02.11.1984,E.1983\/1-129-K.1984\/903)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u00c7e\u015fitli telkin ve kand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 tertip\/beyanlarla ipotek yerine sat\u0131\u015f muamelesi yap\u0131lmas\u0131 hiledir. (Y.HGK.08.07.1972,E.1971\/1-522,K.716)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<blockquote><p>Davac\u0131 senette yaz\u0131lanlar\u0131n noter taraf\u0131ndan kendisine okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 veya senedin yan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi okunmay\u0131p ba\u015fka \u015fekilde okundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrmemi\u015f (sahtelik iddias\u0131), sadece bor\u00e7 para al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in d\u00fczenlenmesi kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan senet ve vekaletnamenin hile ve hata ile gayrimenkul sat\u0131\u015f vaadi \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlendi\u011fini bu belgelere dayanarak tesis olunan tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptal edilmesi gerekti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hilenin veya hatan\u0131n mevcut olabilece\u011finin kabul\u00fcn\u00fc gerektiren \u015fekilde bir a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n noter senedinin alt k\u0131sm\u0131ndaki yaz\u0131lar\u0131n sahteli\u011fini iddia etmemesi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu yaz\u0131lar\u0131n senedin okunmu\u015f ve davac\u0131n\u0131n arzusuna uygun bulunmu\u015f oldu\u011fu vak\u0131as\u0131 hakk\u0131nda usul\u00fcn 295.maddesi uyar\u0131nca <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>KAT\u0130 DEL\u0130L te\u015fkil edece\u011fi<\/strong><\/span> cihetle davac\u0131n\u0131n hile iddias\u0131n\u0131 \u015fahitle ispat etmesine bu davada<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"> <strong>ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddian\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan<\/strong><\/span> imkan verilemez ve davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu nedenle yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. <strong><em>(Y.HGK.06.07.1960,E.1\/61-K.47)<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ehliyetsizlik ve hile hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 davada \u00f6nce ehliyetsizli\u011fin usul\u00fcne uygun olarak ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n ehliyetli oldu\u011funun tespiti halinde hile hukuksal sebebi \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131 gerekir. (Y.1.HD.12.10.2009,E.9563-K.9983)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131n\u0131n serbest iradesi ile yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu temlikten sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen iradeyi bozan olaylar\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 akdin s\u0131hhatini etkilemez. (Y.1.HD.17.09.2009,E.7533-K.9288)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Alacak davalar\u0131nda Whatsapp, Facebook, Gmail gibi elektronik ortamlardaki bilgi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 <strong>&#8221;Belge Delil&#8221;<\/strong> niteli\u011findedir. (Yarg\u0131tay 13.HD.2017\/1014 E.,2020\/4488 K.)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDava, vekalet \u00fccreti alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tahsili amac\u0131yla ba\u015flat\u0131lan icra takibi nedeniyle bor\u00e7lu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti istemine ili\u015fkindir. Mahkemece, al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi raporu do\u011frultusunda sonuca gidilerek davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bilirki\u015fi raporunda; taraflar aras\u0131nda yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir \u00fccret s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespiti ile vekalet \u00fccreti hesaplanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Oysa daval\u0131 avukat taraf\u0131ndan davac\u0131ya g\u00f6nderilen mail yaz\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. <strong>HMK\u2019n\u0131n 199. maddesinde \u201dUyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu vak\u0131alar\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli yaz\u0131l\u0131 veya bas\u0131l\u0131 metin, senet, \u00e7izim, plan, kroki, foto\u011fraf, film, g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc veya ses kayd\u0131 gibi veriler ile elektronik ortamdaki veriler ve bunlara benzer bilgi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 bu Kanuna g\u00f6re belgedir.\u201d yaz\u0131l\u0131d\u0131r. Bu d\u00fczenleme ile mail yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 da belge olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/strong> O halde, mahkemece mail yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 ve davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan \u00f6demeler de\u011ferlendirilerek davac\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7lu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik inceleme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup, bozma nedenidir.<em>\u201d<\/em>(T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 13. Hukuk Dairesi \u00a02017\/1014 Esas ve 2020\/4488 Karar)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDi\u011fer taraftan, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi\u2019nce, istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine ili\u015fkin karar gerek\u00e7esinde, \u201cWhatsApp\u201d program\u0131 mesajla\u015fma d\u00f6k\u00fcm\u00fcne de dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de; bu d\u00f6k\u00fcm daval\u0131 i\u015fverence, davac\u0131 ile \u2026 aras\u0131ndaki yaz\u0131\u015fmalara ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu iddia edilerek dosyaya sunulmu\u015ftur. An\u0131lan d\u00f6k\u00fcme kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 vekilinin, <strong>ger\u00e7e\u011fe ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k itiraz\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> <strong>Bu mesajla\u015fma yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131na nas\u0131l ula\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ger\u00e7e\u011fe uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6nlerinden hukuka uygunluk denetimi yap\u0131lmas\u0131na elveri\u015fli bir delil<\/strong> ise dosya i\u00e7eri\u011finde yoktur. An\u0131lan sebeplerle, eksik ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve incelemeyle h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi hatal\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.\u201d (T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 22. Hukuk Dairesi 2018\/524 Esas,\u00a0 2018\/5611 Karar )<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesi karar\u0131nda, erke\u011fin yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 kabul etti\u011finden bahisle, erke\u011fin ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015fse de fiili ayr\u0131l\u0131k d\u00f6neminde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen <strong>yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n tarihi belli de\u011fildir.<\/strong> Bunun yan\u0131nda, daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 erke\u011fin fiili ayr\u0131l\u0131k d\u00f6neminde \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n davac\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 kad\u0131n taraf\u0131ndan <strong>ne \u015fekilde elde edildi\u011fi belli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan,<\/strong> hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olan bu delile itibar edilerek daval\u0131-kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 erke\u011fe kusur y\u00fcklenmesi yerinde olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. (T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 2. Hukuk Dairesi 2019\/1601 Esas ve\u00a0 2019\/8698 Karar)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 199. maddesinde belge kavram\u0131 \u201dUyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu vak\u0131alar\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli yaz\u0131l\u0131 veya bas\u0131l\u0131 metin, senet, \u00e7izim, plan, kroki, foto\u011fraf, film, g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc veya ses kayd\u0131 gibi veriler ile elektronik ortamdaki veriler ve bunlara benzer bilgi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 bu Kanuna g\u00f6re belgedir.\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu halde, davac\u0131 yanca delil olarak dayan\u0131lan mesajlar 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 199. maddesi anlam\u0131nda belge niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir. HMK\u2019n\u0131n 202. maddesinde de (1)Senetle ispat zorunlulu\u011fu bulunan h\u00e2llerde delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 bulunursa tan\u0131k dinlenebilir. (2) Delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131, iddia konusu hukuki i\u015flemin tamamen ispat\u0131na yeterli olmamakla birlikte, s\u00f6z konusu hukuki i\u015flemi muhtemel g\u00f6steren ve kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen kimse veya temsilcisi taraf\u0131ndan verilmi\u015f veya g\u00f6nderilmi\u015f belgedir.\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenleme getirilerek bu t\u00fcr belgeler delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir (Emsal, Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 24\/11\/2021, E: 2021\/6703 K: 2021\/7141)<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><em>&#8220;<\/em>\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, inan\u00e7 konusunun iadesi y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihte ba\u015flar. \u0130ade borcu do\u011fmadan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 i\u015flemez.<\/strong><em>&#8220;<\/em> (Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, 2011\/1-234 E., 2011\/456 K.)<\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<div>&#8221;Daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan davac\u0131ya g\u00f6nderilen ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bor\u00e7 \u00f6dendi\u011finde iade edilece\u011fine dair ifadeler i\u00e7eren <strong>el yaz\u0131l\u0131 ancak imzas\u0131z not<\/strong>un, HMK 202 anlam\u0131nda <strong>yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r<\/strong> ve tan\u0131k dinlenmesi gerekir&#8221; (Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi, 2015\/12345 E., 2016\/6789 K.)<\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemde m\u00fclkiyet, inan\u0131lana hukuken ge\u00e7er. \u0130nan\u0131lan, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131 tam malik gibi tasarruf edebilir. Muvazaada ise devir ba\u015ftan itibaren ge\u00e7ersizdir ve m\u00fclkiyet devredende kalmaya devam eder.&#8221; (Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 2010\/1-246 E., 2010\/345 K.)<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/1216<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/60<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 11.02.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;.Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusu, niteli\u011fi ve \u00f6denecek miktar gibi hususlarda dikkatsizli\u011fi veya bilgisizli\u011fi sonucu ger\u00e7ek iradesine uymayan beyanda bulunmak suretiyle esasl\u0131 hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanununda esasl\u0131 hatan\u0131n tan\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, 31. maddede s\u0131n\u0131rlay\u0131c\u0131 olmamak \u00fczere \u00f6rnekler g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. K\u0131saca i\u00e7 irade ile a\u00e7\u0131klanan irade aras\u0131ndaki bilmeyerek yap\u0131lan uyumsuzluk olarak tan\u0131mlanan hatan\u0131n esasl\u0131 kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in, uygulamada ve bilimsel alanda ortakla\u015fa benimsendi\u011fi gibi, giri\u015filen taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn ba\u015fl\u0131ca sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi, daha a\u00e7\u0131k s\u00f6yleyi\u015fle hem yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, y\u00f6n\u00fcnden (Subjektif unsur), hem de i\u015f hayat\u0131ndaki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131 (objektif unsur) a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan, hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmese idi b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hi\u00e7 veya a\u00e7\u0131klanan bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aldatma da iradeyi sakatlayan sebeplerden biri olarak TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 36. Maddesinde; \u201cTaraflardan biri, di\u011ferinin aldatmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapm\u0131\u015fsa, yan\u0131lmas\u0131 esasl\u0131 olmasa bile, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015finin aldatmas\u0131 sonucu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n aldatmay\u0131 bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Kanunda hilenin tan\u0131m\u0131na do\u011frudan yer verilmemi\u015f ise de aldatma (hile); genel olarak, bir kimseyi irade beyan\u0131nda bulunmaya, \u00f6zellikle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya sevk etmek i\u00e7in onda kasten hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131rmak veya esasen var olan hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131y\u0131 korumak yahut devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlan\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi \u00fczere hatada yan\u0131lma, hilede ise kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak yan\u0131ltma s\u00f6z konusudur. Hilede irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iradenin beyan\u0131nda de\u011fil, iradenin olu\u015fumunda meydana gelmektedir. \u0130radenin olu\u015fumundaki sakatl\u0131k ise ki\u015finin kendisi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka birinin kas\u0131tl\u0131 bir aldatma fiiliyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmektedir. Nitekim, Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda, hilenin; ger\u00e7ek durumu bilmesi h\u00e2linde bir kimsenin kabul etmeyecek oldu\u011fu bir \u015feyi kabul etmesine di\u011fer bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan yol a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hilenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in baz\u0131 \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ihtiya\u00e7 vard\u0131r:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Birinci \u015fart;<\/strong> \u201caldatma fiili\u201ddir. Aldatan \u015fah\u0131s di\u011ferini yan\u0131ltm\u0131\u015f (hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f) olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Fakat kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bu yan\u0131lman\u0131n esasl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmez (TBK. m.36\/1). \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc aldatan hi\u00e7bir surette korunmaya lay\u0131k de\u011fildir. Aldatan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda, belirli konu ve hususlarda do\u011fru olmayan bilgiler vermekte veya baz\u0131 hususlar\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 gerekirken kasten gizlemektedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u0130kinci \u015fart;<\/strong> \u201caldatma kast\u0131\u201dd\u0131r. Aldatan, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya ikna etmek i\u00e7in ona bilerek ve isteyerek (kasten) ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, yalan s\u00f6yleyende kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131 aldatmak ve onun ger\u00e7e\u011fi bilmesi h\u00e2linde yapmayacak oldu\u011fu bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapma\u011fa sevk etmek niyeti bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer bir kimse, bilmemesi a\u011f\u0131r bir kusur te\u015fkil etmesine ra\u011fmen, durumu bilmeden bir beyanda bulunmu\u015f ise aldatma kast\u0131 yoktur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fart<\/strong> ise \u201cilliyet ba\u011f\u0131\u201dd\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme aldatma sonucu, onun etkisi ile yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aldat\u0131lan yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi, aldatma olmas\u0131yd\u0131 ya hi\u00e7 yapmayacak ya da daha iyi \u015fartlarda yapacak idiyse, illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur. Aldatma fiili, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n asli \u015fart\u0131 olmal\u0131, aldatma ile s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda tabi bir illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r <em>(Eren, F.: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, s. 414 vd., HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 20.10.2010 tarih ve 2010\/1-502 E., 2010\/536 K.; 08.07.2020 tarih ve 2017\/1-1831 E., 2020\/549 K. Say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taraflardan birinin, di\u011ferinin aldatmas\u0131 (hilesi) ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde yan\u0131lmas\u0131 esasl\u0131 olmasa bile s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131 Kanun\u2019un a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fidir. Ancak somut olayda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f\u0131na ili\u015fkin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin, daval\u0131 sat\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fil de dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 &#8230;\u2019un hilesi sonucunda yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda, hilenin bizzat s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131nca yap\u0131labilece\u011fi gibi \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan da yap\u0131labilece\u011fi belirtilmelidir. Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin hilesi ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptalini isteyebilmesi i\u00e7in lehine hile yap\u0131lan kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada hileyi bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 gerekir. Hileyi yapan ki\u015finin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin taraf\u0131 m\u0131 yoksa \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi mi oldu\u011fu ise Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 25.03.2015 tarihli ve 2013\/19-1707 E., 2015\/1072 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi<span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong> s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin haz\u0131rl\u0131k, m\u00fczakere ve kurulma a\u015famalar\u0131na kat\u0131l\u0131p kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6re saptanacakt\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bu \u00fc\u00e7 a\u015famas\u0131ndan birine veya bir ka\u00e7\u0131na kat\u0131lan ki\u015fi art\u0131k o s\u00f6zle\u015fmede TBK\u2019n\u0131n 36\/2. maddesi anlam\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi say\u0131lmayacakt\u0131r.<\/strong><\/span> Di\u011fer taraf ile beraber ya da onun ad ve hesab\u0131na veya ba\u015fka herhangi \u015fekilde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131na kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olan ki\u015filer \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi konumundad\u0131rlar. Bu a\u00e7\u0131klama uyar\u0131nca vekil taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde vekilin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi say\u0131lmas\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir. Vekilin hilesi de \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin hilesi olarak de\u011fil kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n hilesi olarak de\u011ferlendirilecektir. Somut olayda iptal istemine konu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019a aitken, 20.12.2011 tarihli vek\u00e2letname ile yetkili k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 vekil &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn davac\u0131ya sat\u0131larak devri yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. B\u00f6yle olunca ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesini vekil s\u0131fat\u0131yla bizzat yapan bu ki\u015finin hilesi, hileyi bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 ko\u015fulu aranmaks\u0131z\u0131n akidin hilesi olarak kabul edilecektir. Ancak aldatmay\u0131 (hileyi) ispat y\u00fck\u00fc, aldat\u0131lan tarafa aittir. Hata, hile ve ikrah iddialar\u0131n\u0131n senede ba\u011flanmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan senetle ispat edilmesinde maddi imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131k vard\u0131r. Bu nedenle hukuki i\u015flemlerdeki irade bozuklu\u011fu iddialar\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) 203\/1- \u00e7 maddesinde senede kar\u015f\u0131 senetle ispat zorunlulu\u011funun istisnalar\u0131 aras\u0131nda say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fme resm\u00ee senetle yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) \u201cResm\u00ee belgelerle ispat\u201d kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 7. maddesi \u201cResm\u00ee sicil ve senetler, belgeledikleri olgular\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funa kan\u0131t olu\u015fturur. Bunlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131, kanunlarda ba\u015fka bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, her hangi bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, hile olgusunun tan\u0131k d\u00e2hil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Davac\u0131 taraf hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131 i\u00e7in tan\u0131k deliline dayanm\u0131\u015f ise de hilenin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini kabul etmek i\u00e7in dinlenen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli oldu\u011funu kabul etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Davac\u0131 ile emlak i\u015fi yapan &#8230;\u2019un uzun s\u00fcredir birbirlerini tan\u0131d\u0131klar\u0131 ve s\u00fcrekli irtibat h\u00e2linde olduklar\u0131, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin daha \u00f6nce davac\u0131ya \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz satt\u0131\u011f\u0131, hatta bunlardan birinin 877 parseldeki 2 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm oldu\u011fu, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazla ayn\u0131 apartman\u0131n ayn\u0131 kat\u0131nda bulunan bu daireyi davac\u0131n\u0131n 27.04.2011 tarihinde sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 dosya kapsam\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131nda arac\u0131l\u0131k yapan &#8230;\u2019un i\u015fi gere\u011fi \u00e7ok say\u0131da ta\u015f\u0131nmaz gezdirmi\u015f olmas\u0131 hilenin bir unsuru olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi gibi davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131 emlak\u00e7\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6sterilen evin dubleks bir daire oldu\u011funu beyan etmelerine kar\u015f\u0131n dava konusu daire normal bir dairedir. Davac\u0131ya g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi iddia edilen dubleks daire ile sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan 4 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn farkl\u0131 mahallelerde bulundu\u011fu da dava dilek\u00e7esindeki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar ile sabittir. Oysa ki, sat\u0131\u015fa ili\u015fkin resm\u00ee senedin d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi tarihte y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan m\u00fclga Tapu Sicili T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 16. maddesine g\u00f6re akdi gerektiren i\u015flemlerde resmi senet d\u00fczenlenir. <strong>D\u00fczenlenen resmi senet memur taraf\u0131ndan m\u00fcd\u00fcr ve taraflar\u0131n huzurunda okunur. Taraflar isterlerse resmi senedi kendileri de al\u0131p okuyabilirler.<\/strong> Resmi senette ise ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bulundu\u011fu mahalle yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi niteli\u011finin dubleks daire olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu durum da yaz\u0131l\u0131r. Yine, T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn 101. maddesine g\u00f6re tapu dairesinde akitli veya akitsiz i\u015flemlerle ilgili olarak <strong>d\u00fczenlenen tapu senedi veya ipotek belgelerinin birer \u00f6rne\u011fi, m\u00fcd\u00fcr taraf\u0131ndan hak sahiplerine verilir.<\/strong> Tapu sicilleri aleni oldu\u011fundan davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flem yapmadan \u00f6nce de sicil kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 inceleme imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle <strong>basit bir inceleme<\/strong> ile sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bulundu\u011fu mahalle ile niteli\u011fini tespit etmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan davac\u0131n\u0131n, resmi senet i\u00e7eri\u011fi kendi huzurunda okunmu\u015f ve tapu senedinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na, yine ayn\u0131 apartmandan k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre \u00f6nce ba\u015fka bir daire sat\u0131n alm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n, hile ile ba\u015fka mahallede ve farkl\u0131 nitelikte bir dairenin sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesi inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bulunmam\u0131\u015f ve hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hile ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, somut olayda ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar ba\u015f\u0131nda ke\u015fif yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n da sonuca bir etkisinin olmayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r&#8230;.&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nanca dayal\u0131 temliki i\u015flem, uygulamada en \u00e7ok rastlanan \u015fekliyle, resmi veya yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131lan davada da o s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin aksi iddia edilmekte veya a\u00e7\u0131lan dava yaz\u0131l\u0131 veya resmi s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin niteli\u011fi, taraflar\u0131 gibi baz\u0131 unsurlar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirmekte ise, davan\u0131n HMK n\u0131n 290(201) maddesine g\u00f6re yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131 gerekmektedir.5.2.1947 tarih ve 1945\/20 E.,1947\/6 K. Say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130BK ile de an\u0131lan madde h\u00fckm\u00fcne uygun kural getirilmi\u015f, ancak resmi s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin aksinin yaz\u0131l\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ispat\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yine dava (inan\u00e7) konusunun de\u011feri HMK 288(200) maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen miktar\u0131 a\u015f\u0131yorsa, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil veya yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131lan bir belge ve bu belgeyi tamamlayan \u00f6teki delillerle ispat edilmelidir. Alaca\u011f\u0131n temliki Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 163(184) maddesi uyar\u0131nca yaz\u0131l\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekir. Yaz\u0131l\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile devredilen bu alaca\u011f\u0131n tahsil, teminat, inanan veya 3.ki\u015fi yarar\u0131na bir \u015fey almak gibi ama\u00e7larla inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak devredildi\u011fi iddia edilirse, bu iddian\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131 zorunludur. Ticari senet de T\u00fcrk Ticaret Kanunun 593(681) maddesine g\u00f6re yaz\u0131l\u0131 temlik edilebilece\u011finden bu i\u015flemin inan\u00e7l\u0131 oldu\u011funun ispat\u0131 da ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde yaz\u0131l\u0131 belge ile olmal\u0131d\u0131r. <em>11. HD.12.2.1991 T.1990\/4988 E.1991\/7141 K.14.HD.25.9.2001 T.2001\/4734 E.2001\/5933 K.14.HD.21.9.2001 T.2001\/5633E.2001\/5812K.<\/em><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n yerle\u015fik uygulamas\u0131 ve \u00f6\u011fretideki genel kabule g\u00f6re maddi olgunun tespitine ili\u015fkin ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flar. Ceza mahkemesinde bir maddi olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da yoklu\u011fu konusundaki kesinle\u015fmi\u015f kabule ra\u011fmen ayn\u0131 konunun hukuk mahkemesinde yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir. ( YARGITAY HGK 11.10.1989 tarih 1989\/11-373 E.1989\/472 K.) Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla maddi olaylar\u0131 ve yasak eylemleri saptayan ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131, taraflar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kesin delil niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131r. <em>Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD.2016\/17669 E.2021\/1158 K.<\/em><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemlerde son kay\u0131t malikinin daval\u0131 iktisab\u0131n\u0131n iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 , TMK n\u0131n 1023 maddesinin koruyuculu\u011fundan yararlan\u0131p yararlanmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve sonucuna g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekir. Y<em>.1.HD.2020\/942 E.2021\/1153 K.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/1216<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/60<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 11.02.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;Di\u011fer taraftan; aldatmay\u0131 bir \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131s yapm\u0131\u015f ise, bu aldatman\u0131n akdin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkilemesi i\u00e7in yukar\u0131da belirtilen \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olmas\u0131 yan\u0131nda, kar\u015f\u0131 akidin bu aldatmay\u0131 bilmesi veya bilmesinin gerekli olmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131 aran\u0131r. Bu \u015fart ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmezse \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fahs\u0131n davac\u0131y\u0131 aldatmas\u0131 akdin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkilemez&#8230;&#8221; <strong>\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin aksinin ispat\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil bulunmasa dahi uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n vukuuna delalet edecek KAR\u015eI TARAFIN EL\u0130NDEN \u00c7IKMI\u015e (\u0130nan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan el ile yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f fakat imzalanmam\u0131\u015f olan bir senet veya mektup, daktilo veya bilgisayarla yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla birlikte inan\u0131lan\u0131n paraf\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan belge, usul\u00fcne uygun onanmam\u0131\u015f parmak izli veya m\u00fch\u00fcrl\u00fc senetler gibi) delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131labilecek bir belge varsa 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK n\u0131n 202. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi tan\u0131k dahil her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilir<\/strong>.<em>14. HD.2017\/1644 E.2020\/8264 K.<\/em><\/p>\n<div class=\"adn ads\" data-message-id=\"#msg-a:r-8035395318502193511\" data-legacy-message-id=\"1875c181e283e61d\">\n<div class=\"gs\">\n<div class=\"\">\n<div id=\":2bd\" class=\"ii gt\">\n<div id=\":2be\" class=\"a3s aiL \">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><center><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/center><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2014\/19158<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2017\/2018<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 18.04.2017<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; muvazaa, k\u0131saca irade ve beyan aras\u0131nda bilerek yarat\u0131lan uyumsuzluk \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanabilir. Muvazaada taraflar \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fileri aldatmak amac\u0131yla ger\u00e7ek iradelerine uymayan, aralar\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayan bir g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f yaratmak i\u00e7in anla\u015farak bazen asl\u0131nda bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapma iradesi ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131klar\u0131 halde g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fte bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaktad\u0131rlar (mutlak muvazaa) veya ger\u00e7ek iradelerine uygun olarak yapt\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iradelerine uymayan g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fteki bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile gizlemektedirler (nisbi muvazaa). Yanlar, ister salt bir g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f yaratmak i\u00e7in, ister ba\u015fka bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi gizlemek amac\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fme yaps\u0131nlar g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fteki s\u00f6zle\u015fme ger\u00e7ek iradelerine uymad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, tabandaki s\u00f6zle\u015fme de tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda \u015fekil ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ge\u00e7ersizdir. Her ne kadar, muvazaay\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun(TBK) 19. (818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun(BK) 18.) maddesinde ve \u00f6teki kanun h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinde muvazaal\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda bir a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k bulunmamakta ise de; taraflar aras\u0131nda alacak ve bor\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131, muvazaan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n hi\u00e7bir s\u00fcreye ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her zaman ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fi, mahkemece kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, belirli bir s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesi, sebebin ortadan kalkmas\u0131 veya ilgililerin olur (icazet) vermesi ile ge\u00e7erli hale gelmeyece\u011fi uygulamada ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerde ortakla\u015fa kabul edilmektedir. Bunun yan\u0131nda, muvazaa nedeniyle ge\u00e7ersiz s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayan\u0131larak bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapuda temliki yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa bu tescil yolsuz bir tescil h\u00fckm\u00fcndedir. Tapuda yap\u0131lan temlik ve tesciller illi i\u015flemler oldu\u011fundan tapunun dayana\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7ersiz ise tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n da 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun(TMK) 1025. maddesine g\u00f6re iptali gerekir. Ayr\u0131ca muvazaal\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren taraflar aras\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan dava sonunda verilen karar, yenilik do\u011furucu (in\u015fa\u00ee) bir h\u00fck\u00fcm de\u011fil a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 (ihdas\u00ee) bir h\u00fck\u00fcm durumundad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan, muvazaan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden taraf veya bunlar\u0131n ard\u0131l\u0131 (halefi) s\u0131fat\u0131 ile hareket eden, ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yanlar\u0131ndan birine teb&#8217;an dava a\u00e7an ki\u015fi TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 6. maddesi gere\u011fince bu iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmek zorundad\u0131r. <strong>Senede ba\u011fl\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye kar\u015f\u0131 muvazaa iddias\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun(HMK) 200. ve 201. (1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun(HUMK) 288. ve 290.) maddelerinde belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere ancak yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille kan\u0131tlanabilir.<\/strong> S\u00f6zle\u015fme HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 203. (HUMK&#8217;n\u0131n 293.) maddesinde s\u00f6z\u00fc edilen <strong>yak\u0131n akrabalar aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi, muvazaan\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille ispat edilmesi gerekir.<\/strong> B\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin resmi \u015fekilde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde bile olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi itibariyle adi yaz\u0131l\u0131 delilin yeterli olaca\u011f\u0131 \u00f6\u011fretide ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015f yarg\u0131sal i\u00e7tihatlarda ortakla\u015fa kabul edilmi\u015ftir. \u0130\u015fte bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften hareketle, 5.2.1947 tarih 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda taraf muvazaas\u0131 ve takma ad (nam\u0131-m\u00fcstear) davalar\u0131nda iddian\u0131n ancak yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille kan\u0131tlanabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2021\/6587<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2023\/2568<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 15.05.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><em>6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun; 211. maddesinin ilgili k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir;&#8221;<\/em><\/div>\n<ul>\n<li dir=\"auto\">(1) <strong>Bir belgenin sahteli\u011finin iddia edilmesi durumunda,<\/strong> bu hususta kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 da dikkate al\u0131narak, a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki s\u0131ra ile inceleme yap\u0131larak \u00f6ncelikle karar verilir:<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">a) H\u00e2kim, yaz\u0131 veya imzay\u0131 ink\u00e2r eden taraf\u0131 isticvap ettikten sonra bir kanaat edinememi\u015fse, huzurda bu ki\u015fiye yaz\u0131 yazd\u0131r\u0131p imza att\u0131rmak suretiyle elde etti\u011fi belge ve di\u011fer delilleri de\u011ferlendirir. H\u00e2kim,\u00a0 konusunda ba\u015fka bir incelemeye gerek duymadan karar verebilecek durumda ise gerek\u00e7esini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtmek suretiyle, senedin sahteli\u011fi hakk\u0131nda bir karar verir. \u0130sticvap i\u00e7in mahkemeye davet edilen taraf, belirtilen g\u00fcnde haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde, ink\u00e2r etmi\u015f oldu\u011fu belgedeki yaz\u0131 veya imzay\u0131 ikrar etmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r; bu husus kendisine \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lacak davetiyede ayr\u0131ca ihtar edilir.<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">b) (a) bendi h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 incelemeye ra\u011fmen, h\u00e2kimde sahtelik konusunda kesin bir kanaat olu\u015fmam\u0131\u015fsa, bilirki\u015fi incelemesine karar verir. Bilirki\u015fi incelemesinden \u00f6nce, mevcutsa, o tarafa ait olan kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma yapmaya elveri\u015fli yaz\u0131 ve imzalar, ilgili yerlerden getirtilir. Bilirki\u015fi, bu yaz\u0131 ve imzalarla, o mahkemede elde edilen yaz\u0131 ve imzalar\u0131 esas alarak inceleme yapar. Bilirki\u015fi, inceleme i\u00e7in gerekli g\u00f6r\u00fcrse, kendi huzurunda taraf\u0131n yeniden yaz\u0131 yazmas\u0131 veya imza atmas\u0131n\u0131 mahkemeden talep edebilir.&#8221;<\/li>\n<li dir=\"auto\">Bir senedin sahte oldu\u011funa dair karar kesinle\u015ftikten sonra, senedin alt\u0131na sahte oldu\u011fu yaz\u0131larak senet iptal olunur. Resm\u00ee senetlerde, senedin ilgili dairedeki asl\u0131 da bu yolla iptal edilir.&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><em>HMK Md.209.&#8221;<\/em><\/div>\n<ul>\n<li dir=\"auto\">(1) <strong>Adi bir senetteki yaz\u0131 veya imza ink\u00e2r edildi\u011finde, bu konuda bir karar verilinceye kadar, o senet herhangi bir i\u015fleme esas al\u0131namaz.<\/strong>(2) <strong>Resm\u00ee senetlerdeki yaz\u0131 veya imza ink\u00e2r edildi\u011finde, senetteki yaz\u0131 veya imzan\u0131n sahteli\u011fi, <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">ancak mahkeme karar\u0131yla sabit olursa,<\/span> bu senet herhangi bir i\u015fleme esas al\u0131namaz.<\/strong>(3) Senede dayan\u0131larak verilmi\u015f olan ihtiyati tedbir, o senet hakk\u0131ndaki sahtelik iddias\u0131ndan etkilenmez ve gerekti\u011finde senet sahibi haklar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeni tedbirler talep edebilir.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em>HMK Md.213 .&#8221; <\/em><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>(1) Sahtelik iddias\u0131 sonunda haks\u0131z \u00e7\u0131kan taraf k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli ise bu sebeple ertelenen her bir duru\u015fma i\u00e7in celse harc\u0131na ve talep h\u00e2linde bu sebeple di\u011fer taraf\u0131n u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 zararlar\u0131 tazmin etmeye mahk\u00fbm edilir.<\/li>\n<li>(2) Resm\u00ee senetteki imza veya yaz\u0131 ink\u00e2r edildi\u011finde, yukar\u0131daki har\u00e7 miktar\u0131 iki kat\u0131 olarak uygulan\u0131r.<\/li>\n<li>(3) Bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmesinden \u00f6nce, taraflar\u0131n sahteli\u011fe ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7meleri h\u00e2linde, h\u00e2kim, tazminattan indirim yapabilece\u011fi gibi tazminata h\u00fckmetmeyebilir&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Mahkemece, senet alt\u0131ndaki davac\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;a ait imzan\u0131n sahte oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 211. maddesi gere\u011fince <strong>&#8220;\u00f6n sorun&#8221; kabul edilerek<\/strong> var\u0131lacak sonu\u00e7 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde di\u011fer t\u00fcm deliller ile birlikte bir karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik soru\u015fturma ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 <\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2022\/5669<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2022\/6353<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 03.10.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><strong>Hukuki sebeplerden bir tanesinin \u00f6teki hukuki nedenin incelenmesine olanak verir nitelikte bulundu\u011fu s\u00fcrece \u00f6nem ve l\u00fczum derecesine g\u00f6re birden fazla hukuki sebep ayn\u0131 davada inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma konusu yap\u0131labilir.<\/strong> Nitekim, yarg\u0131sal uygulama bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6yle ise, <strong>dava dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen ve kamu d\u00fczeni ile ilgili bulunan sahtecilik ve yolsuz tescil iddias\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncelikle ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gereklidir.<\/strong> Sahtecili\u011fin veya yolsuz tescilin saptanmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde \u00f6teki nedenlerin incelenme gere\u011finin ortadan kalkaca\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6ncelikle bu nedenler \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ku\u015fkusuzdur. H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca, \u00f6ncelikle 16.09.2002 tarihli sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fme asl\u0131n\u0131n getirtilerek s\u00f6zle\u015fme sayfas\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n imzas\u0131 yerindeki <strong>&#8221; okudum&#8221; \u015feklindeki yaz\u0131n\u0131n kimin eli \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc (davac\u0131ya m\u0131 yoksa bir ba\u015fkas\u0131na m\u0131 ait) oldu\u011funun Adli T\u0131p Kurumundan al\u0131nacak raporla tespit ettirilmesi,<\/strong> sahte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde davada dayan\u0131lan di\u011fer hukuki neden olan yolsuz tescil <em>(davac\u0131n\u0131n okuma yazma bilip bilmedi\u011fi dolay\u0131s\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iki tan\u0131k huzurunda yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi)<\/em> \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n okuma yazmas\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n duraksamaya yer b\u0131rakmayacak bi\u00e7imde a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmas\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin resmiyete uygun oldu\u011funun belirlenmesi h\u00e2linde ise davada dayan\u0131lan di\u011fer hukuki neden olan hile \u00fczerinde yukar\u0131da de\u011finilen ilkeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda gerekli inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n temliki i\u015flemi \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tarihin duraksamaya yer vermeyecek bi\u00e7imde saptanmas\u0131, taraf delillerinin eksiksiz toplanmas\u0131, toplanan ve toplanacak olan delillerin birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve var\u0131lacak sonu\u00e7 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde bir karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik soru\u015fturma ile h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi&#8230;<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\">Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun 705. maddesinde; \u201cTa\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetinin kazan\u0131lmas\u0131, tescille olur. Miras, mahkeme karar\u0131, cebr\u00ee icra, i\u015fgal, kamula\u015ft\u0131rma h\u00e2lleri ile kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen di\u011fer h\u00e2llerde, m\u00fclkiyet tescilden \u00f6nce kazan\u0131l\u0131r. Ancak, bu h\u00e2llerde malikin tasarruf i\u015flemleri yapabilmesi, m\u00fclkiyetin tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne tescil edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.\u201d 1022\/1. maddesinde; \u201cAyn\u00ee haklar, k\u00fct\u00fc\u011fe tescil ile do\u011far; s\u0131ralar\u0131n\u0131 ve tarihlerini tescile g\u00f6re al\u0131r.\u201d, 1023. maddesinde; \u201cTapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki tescile iyi niyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur.&#8221;, 1024\/2. maddesinde; \u201cBa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olmayan bir hukuk\u00ee i\u015fleme dayanan veya hukuk\u00ee sebepten yoksun bulunan tescil yolsuzdur.\u201d, 1025\/1-2. maddesinde &#8220;Bir ayn\u00ee hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f veya bir tescil yolsuz olarak terkin olunmu\u015f ya da de\u011fi\u015ftirilmi\u015f ise, bu y\u00fczden ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131 zedelenen kimse tapu sicilinin d\u00fczeltilmesini dava edebilir. \u0130yiniyetli \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin bu tescile dayanarak kazand\u0131klar\u0131 ayn\u00ee haklar ve her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tazminat istemi sakl\u0131d\u0131r.&#8221; d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Yukar\u0131da yer verilen yasal d\u00fczenlemeler uyar\u0131nca, ayni haklar tapu siciline tescil ile do\u011far ve <strong>tescilin hukuki netice do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in de<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"> ge\u00e7erli bir hukuki sebebinin bulunmas\u0131<\/span> zorunludur.<\/strong> Bu hususun tapunun illilik prensibinden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Oysa, olu\u015fan sicilin hukuken ge\u00e7erli bir sebebi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde, tescilin yolsuz tescil niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131 ve sicilin iptali gerekece\u011finde ku\u015fku yoktur.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ONB\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2012\/12887<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2014\/1002<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 17.01.2014<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\">&#8221;2002 y\u0131l\u0131 ile protokol\u00fcn imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 2008 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre\u00e7 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n, protokol\u00fc haciz bask\u0131s\u0131 alt\u0131nda imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun d\u00fc\u015fmedi\u011fi, bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te her iki taraf\u00e7a yasal haklar\u0131n usul\u00fcne uygun kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<strong> davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u011fitimi, sosyal durumu, akademik kariyeri, yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revler, deneyim ve tecr\u00fcbesi nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bu d\u00fczeyde bir protokol\u00fc <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">okumadan imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/span> iddias\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi<\/strong>, hata, hile ve ikrah halleri \u00f6zel d\u00fczenlemeler d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda genel olarak BK\u2019nun 23-30 maddelerinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olup davac\u0131n\u0131n somutla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc salt haciz bask\u0131s\u0131 alt\u0131nda oldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki soyut iddias\u0131n\u0131n irade fesad\u0131 hali olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi&#8230;&#8221;<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2021\/814<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> Karar: 2023\/268 <\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 29.03.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\">Dosya kapsam\u0131 ve toplanan deliller bir b\u00fct\u00fcn h\u00e2linde de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; as\u0131l dava davac\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n tapusuz bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 devretmek isterken dava konusu 473 say\u0131l\u0131 parseldeki paylar\u0131n\u0131 devrettiklerini iddia ettikleri, ne var ki an\u0131lan davac\u0131lar\u0131n dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaza biti\u015fik bir tapusuz ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kald\u0131 ki <strong>tapusuz bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde devredilmeyece\u011finin herkes taraf\u0131ndan bilindi\u011fi,<\/strong> davac\u0131lar\u0131n \u00e7apa ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde iradi olarak devrettikleri, bunun aksinin davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 6 nc\u0131 ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 190 \u0131nc\u0131 maddeleri gere\u011fince kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6te yandan resm\u00ee senette g\u00f6sterilen sat\u0131\u015f bedeli ile temlik tarihindeki rayi\u00e7 bedel aras\u0131ndaki fark\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na yan\u0131lg\u0131ya(hataya) d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc sonucunu da do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2019\/2173<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2020\/6321<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 26.11.2020<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131, maliki oldu\u011fu dava konusu 105 ada 151 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n, tek o\u011flu ve daval\u0131lar\u0131n da miras b\u0131rakan\u0131 olan Tahir taraf\u0131ndan <strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">\u201ckira s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin tapuda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi s\u00f6ylenerek\u201d<\/span> aldat\u0131lmas\u0131 sonucu<\/strong> 15.11.2013 tarihli sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemiyle o\u011flu Tahir ad\u0131na tescil edildi\u011fini, o\u011flunun 2015 y\u0131l\u0131nda \u00f6lmesi \u00fczerine de daval\u0131lara intikal etti\u011fini, okuma yazma bilmedi\u011fi ve ya\u015fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u015flemlerini takip eden tek o\u011flu taraf\u0131ndan kand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki zilyetli\u011finin halen devam etti\u011fini, dava tarihinden bir hafta \u00f6nce duruma vak\u0131f oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek dava konusu 105 ada 151 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tescilini istemi\u015ftir. \u0130lk derece mahkemesince, davan\u0131n bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde a\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve aldatma (hile) olgusunun ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine dair verilen karar\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan istinaf\u0131 \u00fczerine &#8230; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi &#8230;. Hukuk Dairesince, istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.(Onama)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<div class=\"yj6qo\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2022\/6502<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2023\/3041<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 31.05.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\">&#8221;Mahkemenin 12.04.2022 tarihli ve 2018\/569 Esas, 2022\/222 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; ATK 4. \u0130htisas Dairesinin 31.12.2021 tarihli raporunda davac\u0131n\u0131n, 22.11.2006 ve 23.11.2006 tarihlerinde fiil ehliyetini haiz oldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcnde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f bildirildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemlerinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihlerde hukuki i\u015flem ehliyetinin yerinde oldu\u011fu,<strong> hataya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ispatlar mahiyette dosya kapsam\u0131nda yaz\u0131l\u0131 herhangi bir delilin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bununla beraber dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispatlamaktan uzak ve genelde duyuma dayal\u0131 beyanlar oldu\u011fu<\/strong>, daval\u0131 tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131ndan, \u00f6zellikle davac\u0131n\u0131n da karde\u015fleri olan &#8230; &#8230; ve &#8230; Tunca&#8217;n\u0131n ifadelerinden, daval\u0131n\u0131n davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki hisselerini davac\u0131ya satarak devretti\u011fi ve kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda paras\u0131n\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sabit oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131n\u0131n davas\u0131n\u0131 ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusu, niteli\u011fi ve \u00f6denecek miktar gibi hususlarda dikkatsizli\u011fi veya bilgisizli\u011fi sonucu ger\u00e7ek iradesine uymayan beyanda bulunmak suretiyle esasl\u0131 hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 &#8230; Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda (TBK) t\u0131pk\u0131 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu (BK) gibi esasl\u0131 hatan\u0131n (yan\u0131lman\u0131n) tan\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, 31 ve 32. maddede s\u0131n\u0131rlay\u0131c\u0131 olmamak \u00fczere \u00f6rnekler g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. K\u0131saca i\u00e7 irade ile a\u00e7\u0131klanan irade aras\u0131ndaki bilmeyerek yap\u0131lan uyumsuzluk olarak tan\u0131mlanan hatan\u0131n (yan\u0131lman\u0131n) esasl\u0131 kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in, uygulamada ve bilimsel alanda ortakla\u015fa benimsendi\u011fi gibi, giri\u015filen taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn ba\u015fl\u0131ca sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi, daha a\u00e7\u0131k s\u00f6yleyi\u015fle hem yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, y\u00f6n\u00fcnden (s\u00fcbjektif unsur), hem de&#8230; hayat\u0131ndaki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131 (objektif unsur) a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan, hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmese idi b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hi\u00e7 veya a\u00e7\u0131klanan bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmas\u0131 zorunludur. Bu ko\u015fullar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, isterse iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmak suretiyle hukuki ili\u015fkiyi ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili (makable \u015famil) olarak ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilir ve verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri isteyebilir. Yeter ki hatan\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 35. (BK&#8217;n\u0131n 25.) ve TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde h\u00fckme ba\u011flanan d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131n. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, <strong>s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131l\u0131rken hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n kusurlu bulunmas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptaline engel de\u011fildir. Ne var ki, TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 35. (BK&#8217;n\u0131n 26.) maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi hatay\u0131 bilmeyen veya bilecek durumda bulunmayan ve kusursuz olan kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n menfi, gerekti\u011finde m\u00fcspet zarar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesi gerekir.<\/strong> \u00d6te yandan, iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hi\u00e7bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Hatan\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131na y\u00f6neltilecek tek tarafl\u0131 bir irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 ile bildirilebilece\u011fi gibi def&#8217;i veya dava yoluyla da kullan\u0131labilir. Ayr\u0131ca hatan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilir.&#8221;<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2020\/128<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2022\/1415<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 02.11.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">&#8221;Dava, aldatma hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir. Somut olayda, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan tapuda yap\u0131lan \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 i\u015flemle daval\u0131 torunlar\u0131na temlik edildi\u011fi g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde, dosya kapsam\u0131 ve toplanan delillere g\u00f6re her \u00fc\u00e7 i\u015flemde de davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin hile ile sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispat edilip edilmedi\u011fi, var\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesinin gerekip gerekmedi\u011fi noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r. Taraflardan biri di\u011fer taraf\u0131 hileyle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya y\u00f6neltmi\u015fse hata esasl\u0131 olmasa bile aldat\u0131lan taraf i\u00e7in s\u00f6zle\u015fme ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131lamaz. De\u011finilen ko\u015fullar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2linde aldat\u0131lan taraf, hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmak suretiyle hukuk\u00ee ili\u015fkiyi ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili (makable \u015famil) olarak ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilir ve verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri isteyebilir. Bilirki\u015fi raporuna g\u00f6re tapuda g\u00f6sterilen sat\u0131\u015f bedelleri ile daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yat\u0131r\u0131lan 60.000TL bedel ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ger\u00e7ek de\u011ferinin alt\u0131nda ise de <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>s\u0131rf bedelin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 hilenin kan\u0131t\u0131 olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi<\/strong><\/span> gibi <strong>taraflar\u0131n babaanne-torun olduklar\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde temlikte d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bedel g\u00f6sterilmesi de hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygundur.<\/strong> Aksine, tapuda uzun s\u00fcreye yay\u0131lan \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 i\u015flemle yap\u0131lan devirlerin her \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcn\u00fcn de hilenin etkisiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini kabul etmek hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca kentsel d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n y\u0131k\u0131l\u0131p yerine yenisinin yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin giri\u015fimlerin de daval\u0131lara yap\u0131lan temliklerden sonra ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.&#8221;<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>YED\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Esas : 2021\/7626<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Karar : 2023\/1364<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Tarih : 07.03.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun (6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun) 371 inci maddesi Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 39 uncu maddesine g\u00f6re, yan\u0131lma veya aldatma sebebiyle ya da korkutulma sonucunda s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, <strong>yan\u0131lma veya aldatmay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi ya da korkutman\u0131n etkisinin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde<\/strong> s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmez veya verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri istemezse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi onam\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 611 inci maddesine g\u00f6re \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, taraflar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 hak ve bor\u00e7lar y\u00fckleyen bir akittir. Ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla ivazl\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme t\u00fcrlerindendir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fme konusu mal\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusuna ge\u00e7irme; bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusu da bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131na Yasa&#8217;n\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc anlamda \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131na girer. Kural olarak, bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayal\u0131 bir temlikin de muvazaa ile illetli oldu\u011funun ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi her zaman m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. En sade anlat\u0131mla muvazaa, irade ile beyan aras\u0131nda kasten yarat\u0131lan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olarak tan\u0131mlanabilir. B\u00f6yle bir iddia kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, <strong>as\u0131l olan taraflar\u0131n akitteki ger\u00e7ek ve m\u00fc\u015fterek ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong> \u015eayet bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temliki i\u015flemde bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetilme ko\u015fulunun de\u011fil de, bir ba\u015fka amac\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirme iradesini ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenirse (\u00f6rne\u011fin miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131ndan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde ise), bu takdirde akdin ivazl\u0131 (bedel kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131) oldu\u011fundan s\u00f6z edilemez; akitte ba\u011f\u0131\u015f amac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst\u00fcn tutuldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131l\u0131r. Bu halde de Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulunun 01.04.1974 tarihli, 1\/2 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 olayda, uygulama yeri bulur. 01.04.1974 tarihli ve 1\/2 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda sonu\u00e7 olarak; \u201c<strong>Bir kimsenin; miras\u00e7\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 miras hakk\u0131ndan yoksun etmek amac\u0131yla, ger\u00e7ekte ba\u011f\u0131\u015flamak istedi\u011fi tapu sicilinde kay\u0131tl\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal\u0131 hakk\u0131nda tapu sicil memuru \u00f6n\u00fcnde iradesini sat\u0131\u015f do\u011frultusunda a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funun ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f bulunmas\u0131 halinde, sakl\u0131 pay sahibi olsun ya da olmas\u0131n miras hakk\u0131 \u00e7i\u011fnenen t\u00fcm miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n, g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcrdeki sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 18. maddesine dayanarak muvazaal\u0131 oldu\u011funu ve gizli ba\u011f\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin de \u015fekil ko\u015fulundan yoksun bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek dava a\u00e7abileceklerine ve bu dava hakk\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7erli s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler i\u00e7in s\u00f6z konusu olan Medeni Kanunun 507 ve 603. maddelerinin sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olmayaca\u011f\u0131na<\/strong>\u201d h\u00fckmedilmi\u015ftir. <strong>Muris muvazaas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6teki nispi muvazaalardan ay\u0131ran unsur ise miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131 aldatmak amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. Daha a\u00e7\u0131k bir anlat\u0131mla, 01.04.1974 tarihli ve 1\/2 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere bu muvazaa t\u00fcr\u00fcnde miras b\u0131rakan, miras\u00e7\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 miras hakk\u0131ndan yoksun etmek amac\u0131yla, ger\u00e7ekte ba\u011f\u0131\u015flamak istedi\u011fi tapuda kay\u0131tl\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal\u0131 hakk\u0131nda tapu memuru \u00f6n\u00fcnde iradesini sat\u0131\u015f veya \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akdi \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klamaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n muvazaal\u0131 i\u015flemi yaparken ger\u00e7ek irade ve amac\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131ndan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rmak olmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Murisin miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131ndan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rma amac\u0131n\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde 01.04.1974 tarihli ve 1\/2 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131 uygulama olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/strong><\/span> <strong>Muris muvazaas\u0131na dayal\u0131 olarak a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda ispat y\u00fck\u00fc ise muvazaan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden tarafa aittir.<\/strong> Gerek 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun 6 nc\u0131 maddesindeki \u201cKanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc ve gerekse 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 190\/1 inci maddesindeki \u201c\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, kanunda \u00f6zel bir d\u00fczenleme bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, iddia edilen vak\u0131aya ba\u011flanan hukuki sonu\u00e7tan kendi lehine hak \u00e7\u0131karan tarafa aittir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 temlikteki ger\u00e7ek irade ve amac\u0131n\u0131n miras\u00e7\u0131dan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rmak oldu\u011funu, bu hususu ileri s\u00fcren davac\u0131 taraf kan\u0131tlamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu t\u00fcr uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131, adil ve do\u011fru bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme ula\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilmesi daval\u0131ya yap\u0131lan temlikin ger\u00e7ek y\u00f6n\u00fcn\u00fcn, di\u011fer bir s\u00f6yleyi\u015fle miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n as\u0131l irade ve amac\u0131n\u0131n duraksamaya yer b\u0131rakmayacak bi\u00e7imde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Bir i\u00e7 sorun olan ve gizlenen ger\u00e7ek irade ve amac\u0131n tespiti ve ayd\u0131nl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmas\u0131 ise genellikle zor oldu\u011fundan bu y\u00f6ndeki delillerin eksiksiz toplanmas\u0131 yan\u0131nda, birlikte ve do\u011fru \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilmesi de b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131nmaktad\u0131r. Bunun i\u00e7in de \u00fclke ve y\u00f6renin gelenek ve g\u00f6renekleri, toplumsal e\u011filimleri, olaylar\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapmakta hakl\u0131 ve makul bir nedeninin bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fme tarihinde murisin ya\u015f\u0131, fiziki ve genel sa\u011fl\u0131k durumu, aile ko\u015fullar\u0131 ve ili\u015fkileri, taraflar ile miras b\u0131rakan aras\u0131ndaki be\u015feri ili\u015fkiler, <strong>elinde bulunan mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n miktar\u0131,<\/strong> <strong>temlik edilen mal\u0131n, t\u00fcm mamelekine oran\u0131,<\/strong> bunun makul kar\u015f\u0131lanabilecek bir s\u0131n\u0131rda kal\u0131p kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi bilgi ve olgular\u0131n g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesinin 2021\/5472 Esas, 2022\/5800 Karar ve 05\/10\/2022 Tarihli karar\u0131n\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:&#8221;&#8230;<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A\u00e7\u0131lan davada bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n, <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusunun edimini yerine getirmedi\u011fi savunmas\u0131,<\/span><\/strong> s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bak\u0131m borcu yerine getirilmedi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla feshini isteme hakk\u0131 <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda kullanmas\u0131 gereken bir hak<\/strong> <\/span>oldu\u011fundan dinlenmez&#8230;.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 565 inci maddesi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>&#8220;a. Tenkise t\u00e2bi kazand\u0131rmalar<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Madde 565-<\/strong> A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131z kazand\u0131rmalar, \u00f6l\u00fcme ba\u011fl\u0131 tasarruflar gibi tenkise t\u00e2bidir:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n, miras\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 kaybeden yasal miras\u00e7\u0131ya miras pay\u0131na mahsuben yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu sa\u011flararas\u0131 kazand\u0131rmalar,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">geri verilmemek kayd\u0131yla altsoyuna malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131 devri veya bor\u00e7tan kurtarma yoluyla yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kazand\u0131rmalar ya da al\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda verilen \u00e7eyiz ve kurulu\u015f sermayesi,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Miras haklar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcmden \u00f6nce tasfiyesi maksad\u0131yla yap\u0131lan kazand\u0131rmalar,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n serbest\u00e7e d\u00f6nme hakk\u0131n\u0131 sakl\u0131 tutarak yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131\u015flamalar ve \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden \u00f6nceki bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde \u00e2det \u00fczere verilen hediyeler d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu ba\u011f\u0131\u015flamalar,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mirasb\u0131rakan\u0131n sakl\u0131 pay kurallar\u0131n\u0131 etkisiz k\u0131lmak amac\u0131yla yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k olan kazand\u0131rmalar.&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Taraflar\u0131n iddia, savunma ve dayand\u0131klar\u0131 belgelere, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hukuki nitelendirilmesi ile uygulanmas\u0131 gereken hukuk kurallar\u0131na, dava \u015fartlar\u0131na, yarg\u0131lamaya h\u00e2kim olan ilkelere, ispat kurallar\u0131na ve temyiz olunan kararda belirtilen gerek\u00e7elere g\u00f6re davac\u0131lar vekilinin a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki paragraflar\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131lar vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde &#8220;bir\u00e7ok yarg\u0131tay karar\u0131nda da oldu\u011fu gibi \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akdi kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda verilen \u015fey, di\u011fer miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n sakl\u0131 paylar\u0131n\u0131 ihlal edecek ya da t\u00fcm mameleki kapsayacak nitelikte olmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Somut olay\u0131m\u0131zda murisin hen\u00fcz kendine intikal etmemi\u015f \u00f6len kar\u0131s\u0131ndan intikal edecek bir arsan\u0131n d\u00f6rtte biri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tek mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 dava konusu olan ta\u015f\u0131nmazd\u0131r. Bu dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz asl\u0131nda 4 katl\u0131 bir ev olup iyi bir mevkide de\u011ferli bir yerdir. Yani malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131 budur. Bu haliyle d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde de yap\u0131lan akit ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir\u201d ifadelerine yer vererek m\u00fcvekkillerinin mirastan mahrum b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin ge\u00e7ersiz oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015f; 20.04.2018 havale tarihli dilek\u00e7esi ile davas\u0131n\u0131n muris muvazaas\u0131 nedeni ile tapu iptal tescil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde terditli tenkis iste\u011fine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Her ne kadar mahkemece, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n 20.04.2018 havale tarihli dilek\u00e7esi \u0131slah dilek\u00e7esi olarak kabul edilmi\u015f ise de, an\u0131lan dilek\u00e7enin davay\u0131 ayd\u0131nlat\u0131c\u0131 mahiyette ibraz edildi\u011fi, dava dilek\u00e7esi ile birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde dayan\u0131lan maddi vak\u0131alar ile netice-i talebi a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n iddias\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirmedi\u011fi ya da geni\u015fletmedi\u011fi tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 11.4.1990 g\u00fcn ve 1990\/1\u2013152, 1990\/236 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, davada dayan\u0131lan maddi olaylar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan birka\u00e7 hukuki nedenin bir arada g\u00f6sterilmesinde ilke olarak usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir y\u00f6n yoktur. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Hukuki sebeplerden bir tanesinin di\u011fer hukuki sebebin incelenmesine olanak verir niteli\u011fi bulundu\u011fu s\u00fcrece \u00f6nem ve l\u00fczum derecesine g\u00f6re birden fazla hukuki sebep ayn\u0131 davada inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma konusu yap\u0131labilir.<\/strong><\/span> <strong>A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hile, bak\u0131m borcuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ve muris muvazaas\u0131 hukuksal nedenleri ile \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin iptali ve \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayan\u0131larak olu\u015fturulan tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile tescili uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclmezse <span style=\"color: #ff6600;\">terditli<\/span> tenkis isteklerine ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gerekmektedir.<\/strong> Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 39 uncu maddesine g\u00f6re 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011finden, hile nedeni ile \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m akdinin iptaline ili\u015fkin talebin reddi yerindedir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Bak\u0131m borcunun yerine getirilmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin feshini isteme hakk\u0131, bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda kullanabilece\u011fi bir hak oldu\u011fundan bu y\u00f6ndeki talebin reddi yerindedir<\/strong><\/span>. Ne var ki mahkemece muris muvazaas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden herhangi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu nedenle bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2022\/8167<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2023\/1323<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 07.03.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\">&#8221;Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n, eylem ve i\u015flemlerinin sebep ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 anlayabilme, de\u011ferlendirebilme ve <strong>ay\u0131rt edebilme kudreti<\/strong> (g\u00fcc\u00fc) bulunmayan bir kimsenin kendi iradesi ile hak kurabilme, bor\u00e7 (y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck)alt\u0131na girebilme ehliyetinden s\u00f6z edilemez. Nitekim 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) \u201cFiil ehliyetine sahip olan kimse, kendi fiilleriyle hak edinebilir ve bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na girebilir\u201d bi\u00e7imindeki 9. maddesi ile \u015fahs\u0131n hak elde edebilmesi, bor\u00e7 (y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck ) alt\u0131na girebilmesi, fiil ehliyetine ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f. 10. maddesi de, fiil ehliyetinin ba\u015fl\u0131ca ko\u015fulu olarak ay\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc ile ergin (&#8230;) olmay\u0131 kabul ederek \u201cAy\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcne sahip ve k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 olmayan her ergin ki\u015finin fiil ehliyeti vard\u0131r.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc getirmi\u015ftir. \u201cAy\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc\u201d eylem ve i\u015flem ehliyeti olarak da tarif edilerek, ayn\u0131 Yasa&#8217;n\u0131n 13. maddesinde \u201cYa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fckl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00fcz\u00fcnden veya ak\u0131l hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131, ak\u0131l zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131, sarho\u015fluk ya da bunlara benzer sebeplerden biriyle akla uygun bi\u00e7imde davranma yetene\u011finden yoksun olmayan herkes bu Kanuna g\u00f6re ay\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcne sahiptir.\u201d denmek suretiyle a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015f, ayr\u0131ca ay\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fc ortadan kald\u0131ran \u00f6nemli nedenlerden baz\u0131lar\u0131na de\u011finilmi\u015ftir. \u00d6nemlerinden dolay\u0131 bu ilkeler, s\u00f6z konusu yasa ile \u00f6teki yasalar\u0131n \u00e7e\u015fitli h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinde de yer alm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusu, niteli\u011fi ve \u00f6denecek miktar gibi hususlarda dikkatsizli\u011fi veya bilgisizli\u011fi sonucu ger\u00e7ek iradesine uymayan beyanda bulunmak suretiyle esasl\u0131 hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda (TBK) t\u0131pk\u0131 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu (BK) gibi <strong>esasl\u0131 hatan\u0131n (yan\u0131lman\u0131n)<\/strong> tan\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, 31 ve 32. maddede s\u0131n\u0131rlay\u0131c\u0131 olmamak \u00fczere \u00f6rnekler g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. K\u0131saca i\u00e7 irade ile a\u00e7\u0131klanan irade aras\u0131ndaki bilmeyerek yap\u0131lan uyumsuzluk olarak tan\u0131mlanan hatan\u0131n (yan\u0131lman\u0131n) esasl\u0131 kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in, uygulamada ve bilimsel alanda ortakla\u015fa benimsendi\u011fi gibi, giri\u015filen taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn ba\u015fl\u0131ca sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi, daha a\u00e7\u0131k s\u00f6yleyi\u015fle hem yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, y\u00f6n\u00fcnden (s\u00fcbjektif unsur), hem de i\u015f hayat\u0131ndaki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131 (objektif unsur) a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan, hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmese idi b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hi\u00e7 veya a\u00e7\u0131klanan bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmas\u0131 zorunludur. Bu ko\u015fullar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, isterse iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmak suretiyle hukuki ili\u015fkiyi ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili (makable \u015famil) olarak ortadan kald\u0131rabilir ve verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri isteyebilir. &#8230; ki hatan\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 35. (BK&#8217;n\u0131n 25.) ve TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde h\u00fckme ba\u011flanan d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131n. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131l\u0131rken hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n kusurlu bulunmas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptaline engel de\u011fildir. Ne var ki, TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 35. (BK&#8217;n\u0131n 26.) maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi hatay\u0131 bilmeyen veya bilecek durumda bulunmayan ve kusursuz olan kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n menfi, gerekti\u011finde m\u00fcspet zarar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesi gerekir. \u00d6te yandan, iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hi\u00e7bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Hatan\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131na y\u00f6neltilecek tek tarafl\u0131 bir irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 ile bildirilebilece\u011fi gibi def&#8217;i veya dava yoluyla da kullan\u0131labilir. Ayr\u0131ca hatan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilir. <strong>Hile (aldatma),<\/strong> genel olarak bir kimseyi irade beyan\u0131nda bulunmaya, \u00f6zellikle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya sevk etmek i\u00e7in onda kasten hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131rmak veya esasen var olan hatal\u0131 bir kan\u0131y\u0131 koruma yahut devam\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlan\u0131r. Hatada yan\u0131lma, hilede ise yan\u0131ltma s\u00f6z konusudur. 6098 s. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun (TBK) 36\/1. (818 s. Bor\u00e7lar Kanun&#8217;un (BK) 28\/1.) maddesinde a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere taraflardan biri di\u011fer taraf\u0131n kas\u0131tl\u0131 aldatmas\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya y\u00f6neltilmi\u015fse yan\u0131lma (hata) esasl\u0131 olmasa bile aldat\u0131lan taraf i\u00e7in s\u00f6zle\u015fme ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131lamaz. De\u011finilen ko\u015fullar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde aldat\u0131lan taraf hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmak suretiyle hukuki ili\u015fkiyi ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili (makable \u015famil) olarak ortadan kald\u0131rabilir ve verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri isteyebilir. \u00d6te yandan, hile her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilece\u011fi gibi iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hi\u00e7 bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Aldatman\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa y\u00f6neltilecek bir irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, defi yahut dava yoluyla da kullan\u0131labilir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin <strong>gabin (a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanma)<\/strong> nedeniyle illetli oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc i\u00e7in edim ve kar\u015f\u0131 edim aras\u0131ndaki orans\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n, taraflardan birinin, di\u011ferinin \u015fahs\u0131nda mevcut \u00f6zel bir durumu bilerek istismar etmesi, s\u00f6m\u00fcrmesi sonucu olu\u015fmas\u0131 gerekir. Dar ve zor durumda kalmalar\u0131 nedeniyle, s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmaya, mallar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bedel ile devretmeye s\u00fcr\u00fcklenmi\u015f ki\u015fileri korumak zay\u0131f\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fcye ezdirmemek i\u00e7in hukukumuzda da d\u00fczenlemeler yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f 6098 s. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanun&#8217;un (TBK) 28. (818 s. Bor\u00e7lar Kanun&#8217;un (BK) 21) maddesi ile aynen; &#8220;Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 edimler aras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir orans\u0131zl\u0131k varsa, bu orans\u0131zl\u0131k, zarar g\u00f6renin zor durumda kalmas\u0131ndan veya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizli\u011finden ya da deneyimsizli\u011finden yararlan\u0131lmak suretiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi takdirde, zarar g\u00f6ren, durumun \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re ya s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 di\u011fer tarafa bildirerek ediminin geri verilmesini ya da s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 kalarak edimler aras\u0131ndaki orans\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesini isteyebilir. Zarar g\u00f6ren bu hakk\u0131n\u0131, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik veya deneyimsizli\u011fini \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi; zor durumda kalmada ise, bu durumun ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l ve her h\u00e2lde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kuruldu\u011fu tarihten ba\u015flayarak be\u015f y\u0131l i\u00e7inde kullanabilir.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fc getirilmi\u015ftir. O halde, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanmadan (gabinden) s\u00f6z edilebilmesi, objektif unsur olan edimler aras\u0131ndaki a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 orans\u0131zl\u0131k yan\u0131nda, bir taraf\u0131n darda kalma, tecr\u00fcbesizlik, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesizlik (hafiflik) hallerinin bulunmas\u0131, di\u011fer yan\u0131n ise yararlanmak, s\u00f6m\u00fcrmek kast\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 bi\u00e7iminde iki s\u00fcbjektif unsurun dahi ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Gabinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar g\u00f6rene (s\u00f6m\u00fcr\u00fclene), s\u00f6zle\u015fme tarihinden itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirerek iptal davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131p iddias\u0131n\u0131 her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille kan\u0131tlama ve verdi\u011fini geri isteme &#8230; ya da s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 kalarak edimler aras\u0131ndaki orans\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesini isteme&#8230; verir. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki gabin davas\u0131nda \u00f6ncelikle edimler aras\u0131ndaki, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 orans\u0131zl\u0131k \u00fczerinde durulmal\u0131, objektif unsur ispatland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde zarar g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc iddia edenin ki\u015fili\u011fi, ya\u015f\u0131, sa\u011fl\u0131k durumu, toplumdaki yeri, ekonomik g\u00fcc\u00fc psikolojik yap\u0131s\u0131 gibi maddi, manevi y\u00f6nler yani s\u00fcbjektif unsur derinli\u011fine ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131p incelenmelidir. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun temsil ve vekalet aktini d\u00fczenleyen h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re, <strong>vekalet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi<\/strong> b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcvenine dayan\u0131r. Vekilin bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7o\u011fu bu &#8230; unsurundan, onun vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun davran\u0131\u015f y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011far. 6098 s. T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda (TBK) sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vekil edene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve 506. maddesinde (818 s. Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 390.) aynen; &#8220;Vekil, vek\u00e2let borcunu bizzat ifa etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ancak vekile yetki verildi\u011fi veya durumun zorunlu ya da team\u00fcl\u00fcn m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde vekil, i\u015fi ba\u015fkas\u0131na yapt\u0131rabilir. Vekil \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zeterek, sadakat ve \u00f6zenle y\u00fcr\u00fctmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan &#8230; sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Vek\u00e2letin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse, g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. (TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 504\/1) S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vekaletin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur. Hatta malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. Vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekil de\u011finilen maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olur. Bu sorumluluk BK&#8217;da daha hafif olan i\u015f\u00e7inin sorumlulu\u011funa k\u0131yasen belirlenirken, TBK&#8217;da benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcslenen basiretli bir vekilin sorumlulu\u011fu esas al\u0131narak daha da a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar. Vekil vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vekalet eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz. Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olup vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir. S\u00f6z konusu Yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan hakim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (re&#8217;sen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fc niyeti te\u015fvik etmek en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221;<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300; text-align: center;\">T.C.<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">13. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">E. 2003\/13229<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">K. 2004\/3913<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">T. 9.3.2004<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>Davac\u0131; dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 noterlik\u00e7e tasdik edilen kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde m\u00fcvekkillerinin hile ile kand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi onaylayan noterin noterlik kanununa ve y\u00f6netmeliklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 bi\u00e7imde s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi tasdik etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptalini istemi\u015flerdir. \u0130leri s\u00fcr\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re davac\u0131lar noterin noterlik kanunu h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davrand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da ileri s\u00fcrerek s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptalini istemi\u015flerdir. <strong>S\u00f6zle\u015fmede imzas\u0131 bulunan noterin ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olan iddian\u0131n h\u00fckmen sabit olmas\u0131 halinde Noterlik Kanunun 162. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca hukuki sorumlulu\u011funa yol a\u00e7abilece\u011finden noterin savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 bu davan\u0131n sonucunu etkileyebilir. Bu durumda mahkemece davac\u0131 tarafa ilgili noter aleyhine dava a\u00e7mak \u00fczere mehil verilerek a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 davan\u0131n i\u015f bu dava ile birle\u015ftirilmesi halinde<\/strong> noterde de savunmalar\u0131 ve delilleri incelenmek sureti ile has\u0131l olacak sonuca uygun h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekirken de\u011finilen bu y\u00f6nlerin g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2022\/6344<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2023\/3521<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 21.06.2023<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u00c7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n daval\u0131lara temlikine ili\u015fkin i\u015flemde davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hileye maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, temlikin iradi olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi, eldeki davada sonradan vekaletname sunan Avukat &#8230;&#8217;e davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan verilen <strong>10.03.2020 tarih ve 01048 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 <\/strong><strong>vekaletnamede, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131lara g\u00f6nderilen 28\/02\/2020 tarih ve 00913 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 azilnamede, dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rken yetkisiz vekil taraf\u0131ndan sunulan 18\/12\/2014 tarih ve 11581 yevmiye say\u0131l\u0131 <\/strong><strong>vekaletnamede de terc\u00fcman bulundurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/strong> davac\u0131n\u0131n mahkemeye bizzat sunmu\u015f oldu\u011fu 11\/10\/2021 tarihli reddi hakim dilek\u00e7esi, 04\/06\/2021 tarihli mahkeme ke\u015fif zapt\u0131 ve dosya i\u00e7erisinde mevcut 18 Aral\u0131k 2014 tarihli <strong>vekaletnameler birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde davac\u0131n\u0131n T\u00fcrk\u00e7e bilmedi\u011fi ve <\/strong><strong>terc\u00fcman bulundurulmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu oldu\u011fu iddialar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi yans\u0131tmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan <\/strong>mahkemece davan\u0131n esastan reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken hem esastan hem de hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, mahkemenin ret gerek\u00e7esine ili\u015fkin an\u0131lan bu yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesinin yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esi ile davac\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenden \u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fc kabul\u00fc ile karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde hata edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 353\/1-b-2 maddesi uyar\u0131nca kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2020\/1-128<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2022\/1415<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 2.11.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Davac\u0131 taraf, davac\u0131n\u0131n meskene ait 1\u20444 pay\u0131 2003 y\u0131l\u0131nda daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;e devretti\u011fini, sonras\u0131nda da m\u00fcvekkilinin sadece m\u00fcteahhitlerle yap\u0131lacak anla\u015fmalarla ilgili yetki verdi\u011fini zannederek 2011 y\u0131l\u0131n\u0131n Nisan ay\u0131nda tapuya g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Davac\u0131n\u0131n ya\u015f\u0131n\u0131n verdi\u011fi acziyet nedeniyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri anlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de davac\u0131 <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>bu sat\u0131\u015f i\u015fleminin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte 69 ya\u015f\u0131nda olup, i\u015flem yapmak \u00fczere tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne gitti\u011fini anlayacak durumda olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir iddia bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Kald\u0131 ki, sat\u0131\u015fa ili\u015fkin resm\u00ee senedin d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi tarihte y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan m\u00fclga Tapu Sicili T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 16. maddesine g\u00f6re akdi gerektiren i\u015flemlerde resm\u00ee senet d\u00fczenlenir. D\u00fczenlenen resm\u00ee senet memur taraf\u0131ndan m\u00fcd\u00fcr ve taraflar\u0131n huzurunda okunur. Taraflar isterlerse resm\u00ee senedi kendileri de al\u0131p okuyabilirler. Resm\u00ee senede taraflar\u0131n foto\u011fraflar\u0131 yap\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. Taraflar resm\u00ee senetteki imza yerine \u201cokudum\u201d ibaresini yazd\u0131ktan sonra, hem imza yerlerini ve hem de kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 birbirlerinin foto\u011fraf\u0131 \u00fczerini imzalarlar. Davac\u0131 da kendi huzurunda okunan resm\u00ee senedi \u201cokudum\u201d ibaresini yazmak suretiyle ilgili yerlerini imzalam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Resm\u00ee senette yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu da a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a yazmaktad\u0131r. Yine, T\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn 101. maddesine g\u00f6re tapu dairesinde akitli veya akitsiz i\u015flemlerle ilgili olarak d\u00fczenlenen tapu senedi veya ipotek belgelerinin birer \u00f6rne\u011fi, m\u00fcd\u00fcr taraf\u0131ndan hak sahiplerine verilir.<\/strong><\/span> Bu nedenle resm\u00ee senet i\u00e7eri\u011fi kendi huzurunda okunmu\u015f olan davac\u0131n\u0131n, 2011 y\u0131l\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemlerinden sonra 2003 y\u0131l\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ilk temlik bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da iradesinin hile ile sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesi, dava dilek\u00e7esinde o tarihteki herhangi bir vak\u0131aya da dayan\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131nda inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bulunmam\u0131\u015f ve iddian\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n 2011 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemlerinin ise hilenin etkisi ile ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini kabul etmek i\u00e7in dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 yeterli de\u011fildir. Keza, resm\u00ee memur \u00f6n\u00fcnde yukar\u0131da niteli\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanan \u015fekilde yap\u0131lan i\u015flemler bulunmakta olup, sadece davac\u0131n\u0131n ya\u015f\u0131 gere\u011fi kand\u0131r\u0131lmaya m\u00fcsait oldu\u011fu olgu&#8230; dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ancak hem davac\u0131 hem de daval\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndan davac\u0131 babaannenin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemlerin mahiyetini anlayabilecek durumda oldu\u011fu, daval\u0131 torunlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok sevdi\u011fi ve onlara d\u00fc\u015fk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu, \u00f6zellikle ba\u015fka iki dairesini satarak sermaye yap\u0131p i\u015f kurmas\u0131 i\u00e7in paras\u0131n\u0131 o\u011fluna veren ancak kurdu\u011fu i\u015fi y\u00fcr\u00fctemeyen o\u011flu nedeniyle torunlar\u0131na bir mal kalmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnen davac\u0131n\u0131n temlikleri iradi olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Kald\u0131 ki, 26.04.2011 tarihinde daval\u0131lardan &#8230;&#8217;e yap\u0131lan pay sat\u0131\u015f\u0131ndan \u00f6nce davac\u0131n\u0131n banka hesab\u0131na 25.04.2011 tarihinde \u201cev yar\u0131 hisse bedeli\u201d a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 ile ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan 60.000TL para yat\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <strong>D\u00fczenlenen bilirki\u015fi raporuna g\u00f6re tapuda g\u00f6sterilen sat\u0131\u015f bedelleri ile daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yat\u0131r\u0131lan 60.000TL bedel ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ger\u00e7ek de\u011ferinin alt\u0131nda ise de s\u0131rf bedelin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 hilenin kan\u0131t\u0131 olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi gibi taraflar\u0131n babaanne-torun olduklar\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde temlikte d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bedel g\u00f6sterilmesi de hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygundur<\/strong>. Aksine, tapuda uzun s\u00fcreye yay\u0131lan \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 i\u015flemle yap\u0131lan devirlerin her \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcn\u00fcn de hilenin etkisiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini kabul etmek hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca kentsel d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n y\u0131k\u0131l\u0131p yerine yenisinin yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin giri\u015fimlerin de daval\u0131lara yap\u0131lan temliklerden sonra ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. T\u00fcm bu nedenlerle Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan somut olayda hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2022\/33<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2022\/2205<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 17.3.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Davac\u0131, dava konusu 11 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki 5 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc 11\/01\/2019 tarihinde ye\u011feni olan daval\u0131ya devretti\u011fini, ancak temlikin iradesi sakatlanmak suretiyle ve sat\u0131\u015f bedeli de \u00f6denmeden ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini, kendisinin ya\u015fl\u0131 oldu\u011funu, kirada oturdu\u011funu ve okuryazar olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 ye\u011feninin; dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 kiraya vererek, elde edece\u011fi kira bedeli ile oturdu\u011fu evin kiras\u0131n\u0131 ve di\u011fer ihtiya\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layabilece\u011fini, bu durumun menfaatine olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, kendisini <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, <\/strong><strong>kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle hareket etti\u011fini,<\/strong><\/span> ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 devretme saiki ile hareket etmedi\u011fini, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan aldat\u0131lmak suretiyle iradesinin sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131ya devredildi\u011fini, s\u00f6zle\u015fme kurulurken esasl\u0131 yan\u0131lmaya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin de kendisine \u00f6denmedi\u011fini, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n rayi\u00e7 bedelinin alt\u0131nda sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve okur yazar olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ise a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanma bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek, tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tesciline, davan\u0131n kabul edilmesi durumunda do\u011fmu\u015f ve do\u011facak zararlar\u0131n\u0131n giderilmesi i\u00e7in tazminata karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 10\/11\/2021 tarihli ve 2021\/934 E., 2021\/1420 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; <strong>davac\u0131n\u0131n dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n devrini 11\/01\/2019 tarihinde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, ayn\u0131 y\u0131l i\u00e7inde ancak eldeki dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n devrinden k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre sonra yine ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki, mesken vas\u0131fl\u0131 1 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc bizzat 18\/03\/2019 tarihinde, 2 numaral\u0131 mesken vas\u0131fl\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc ise 27\/03\/2019 tarihinde sat\u0131\u015f yolu ile dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ki\u015filere devretti\u011fi,<\/strong> davac\u0131n\u0131n sadece bu davaya mahsus ta\u015f\u0131nmaz i\u00e7in tapuda i\u015flem yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, toplanan bilgi ve belgelerden, taraflar\u0131n ceza dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7indeki beyanlar\u0131ndan, \u00f6zellikle dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ili\u015fkin daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a sunulan <strong>harici sat\u0131\u015f senedi ile harici sat\u0131\u015f senedinde adlar\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 olan ve duru\u015fmada dinlenilen tan\u0131klar<\/strong> ile resmi sat\u0131\u015f senedinde tan\u0131k olarak bulunup duru\u015fmada dinlenilen tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n kendi iradesi ile tapuda devri daval\u0131 ye\u011fenine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n hile ve gabin iddialar\u0131n\u0131 HMK.n\u0131n 190. ve TMK.n\u0131n 6. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca kan\u0131tlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f bedeli olarak 150.000,00 TL g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi ve sat\u0131\u015f akdinde sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin nakden ve tamamen al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun belirtildi\u011fi, sat\u0131\u015f akdinde sat\u0131\u015f bedeli \u00f6denmedi\u011fi takdirde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin iade edilece\u011fine dair bir ihtirazi kay\u0131t bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve an\u0131lan resmi senedin aksinin ayn\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7te ba\u015fkaca bir yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a ispat edilemedi\u011fi, ilk derece mahkemesince davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesinde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir y\u00f6n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK.n\u0131n 353\/1-b-1 maddesi uyar\u0131nca, davac\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2022\/4191\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2023\/686\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 09.02.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Davac\u0131 dava dilek\u00e7esinde, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 satmak istedi\u011fini, ye\u011feni &#8230; &#8230;&#8217;in de arkada\u015f\u0131 olan daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019\u0131n dava konusu 905 ada 24 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n oldu\u011fu b\u00f6lgede ev bakt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmesi \u00fczerine daval\u0131 ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcklerini ve anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, bedelin \u00f6denece\u011finin s\u00f6ylenmesine ra\u011fmen hi\u00e7bir \u00f6deme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ye\u011feninin arkada\u015f\u0131 diye g\u00fcvendi\u011fi daval\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcrekli bu tarz i\u015fler yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, hile ile aldat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bedelin \u00e7ok d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011funu, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 yararlanman\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrerek, tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tesciline karar verilmesini istemi\u015f, a\u015famada \u0131slahla <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>ye\u011fenin \u00e7ok borcu oldu\u011funu ve zor durumda oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyerek kendisine psikolojik bask\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, dava konusu ve dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 ipotek verdi\u011fini zannederek i\u015flem yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak kendisinin kand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131<\/strong><\/span>, emlak vergisini \u00f6demek i\u00e7in belediyeye gitti\u011finde ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131n devredildi\u011fini \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini, bu konuda \u015fikayette de bulundu\u011funu, \u00dcnye 3. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 2020\/323 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n sonucunun beklenilmesi gerekti\u011fini bildirmi\u015ftir. \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131 ile, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131nda her ne kadar davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi oldu\u011fu bilinmeksizin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ifadeler mevcut ise de; <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan davac\u0131ya kar\u015f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015f bir hile (aldatma) olgusundan s\u00f6z edilmedi\u011fi, olayda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi durumunda bulunan davac\u0131n\u0131n ye\u011feni &#8230; &#8230;&#8217;in hileli davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 nedeniyle iradesinin fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsedilebilece\u011fi, bu durumda ise kanunda <span style=\"color: #ff6600;\">daval\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada aldatmay\u0131 bilmesi veya bilecek durumda olmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n arand\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/span> dosya kapsam\u0131ndan daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;n\u0131n, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi &#8230; &#8230;&#8217;in hilesinden haberdar olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin <span style=\"color: #800080;\">somut bir delil<\/span> bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/strong><\/span>&#8230; &#8230; ile daval\u0131 &#8230; aras\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesini sakata u\u011fratacak eylemler noktas\u0131nda bir anla\u015fma bulundu\u011funun ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yine ceza dosyas\u0131nda yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada da daval\u0131 aleyhine kovu\u015fturma bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Temyizen incelenen karar, taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131na, dayand\u0131klar\u0131 belgelere, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa uygulanmas\u0131 gereken hukuk kurallar\u0131 ile hukuki ili\u015fkinin nitelendirilmesine, dava \u015fartlar\u0131na, yarg\u0131lama ve ispat kurallar\u0131 ile kararda belirtilen gerek\u00e7elere g\u00f6re usul ve kanuna uygun olup davac\u0131 vekilince temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen nedenler karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek nitelikte g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. Temyiz olunan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 370 inci maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca ONANMASINA,<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2018\/2470<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2018\/13056<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 3.10.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>\u00d6te yandan 30.03.2010 ve 05.02.2010 tarihlerinde iki ayr\u0131 temlik yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup, ilk temlik ikrah alt\u0131nda yap\u0131ld\u0131 ise B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehirde ya\u015fayan bir kimsenin kolluk g\u00fc\u00e7lerine ba\u015fvurmadan ikinci temliki yapmas\u0131 da hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. T\u00fcm bu maddi olgular yukardaki ilkelerle birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, <strong>temlikin bor\u00e7 i\u00e7indeki o\u011flunu kurtarmak amac\u0131 ile iradi olarak yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/strong> ikrah\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2021\/2062<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2021\/5896<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 21.10.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>&#8230;<strong>2009 y\u0131l\u0131nda \u00f6demesini yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi pay\u0131n temlikini 2011 y\u0131l\u0131nda istemesinin de hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu&#8230;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">11. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">E. 2020\/7077<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">K. 2022\/3979<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T. 24.5.2022<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerinde Buca\u00a0Tapu\u00a0Sicil M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 30\/12\/2014 tarih 30472 yevmiye numaral\u0131 resmi senedi ile dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 Pen&#8230; Ltd. \u015eti.&#8217;nin bor\u00e7lulara kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k olarak 400.000,00 TL bedelli ipotek tesis edildi\u011fi, ipotek belgesinde davac\u0131 &#8230; &#8230;&#8217;in resmi senedi okudu\u011funa ili\u015fkin kendi el yaz\u0131s\u0131 ile &#8220;okudum&#8221; ibaresinin ve imzas\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, ayr\u0131ca ipotek senedinde resmi senedin tamam\u0131n\u0131n resmi memur taraf\u0131ndan okundu\u011funun ve okutuldu\u011funun da belirtildi\u011fi, s\u00f6z konusu belirtmenin davac\u0131n\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131n hemen \u00fcst\u00fcndeki paragrafta yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 banka yetkilisi ile \u015firket sahibinin imzalam\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu belgenin evinin ipotek alt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren ipotek akit belgesi oldu\u011funu s\u00f6ylemedikleri, bu konuda sessiz kalarak\u00a0hile\u00a0ile davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesini fesada u\u011fratt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n iddia etmi\u015f ise de, <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">bir kimsenin resmi memur \u00f6n\u00fcnde imzas\u0131n\u0131n onanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in belge d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi s\u0131rada bu belgeyi okumam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n\u00a0hile\u00a0say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131<\/span>, hilenin yarar\u0131na irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131nda bulunan ki\u015finin yahut \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin eylemi olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, d\u00fczenlenen bir belgeyi\u00a0okumama\u00a0durumunun\u00a0hile<wbr \/>\u00a0olarak say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in daval\u0131n\u0131n veya 3. bir ki\u015finin bu okumamay\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bir davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekti\u011fi,<\/strong> daval\u0131 banka yetkilisi ile \u015firket yetkilisinin belgenin i\u00e7eri\u011finden bahsetmeyerek sessiz kalmalar\u0131n\u0131n okumamay\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bir davran\u0131\u015f olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, taraflar\u0131n s\u0131fat\u0131na g\u00f6re de tan\u0131k delilinin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde etkili olmayaca\u011f\u0131, hileden faydalanan\u0131n davada taraf olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davac\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. ( Onama )<\/p>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2011\/4301<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2011\/8386<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 15.7.2011<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<div dir=\"auto\">Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131n\u0131n edindi\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn iki yevmiye sonra ve 6 par\u00e7a parseli bir anda <strong>daval\u0131ya temlik etmesinin <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">ge\u00e7erli bir nedeninin bulunmas\u0131<\/span> icap eder.<\/strong> Oysa, b\u00f6yle bir nedenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015f ve kan\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f de\u011fildir.<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\"><center><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/center><\/p>\n<table class=\" aligncenter\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2018\/1067<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2019\/141<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 14.02.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000; text-align: center;\">\u00dclkemizde, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz devirleri s\u0131ras\u0131nda daha az har\u00e7 \u00f6demek maksad\u0131yla ger\u00e7ek al\u0131m sat\u0131m bedeli yerine belediyelerce tespit edilen ve \u00e7ok daha d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olan emlak de\u011feri \u00fczerinden tapuda i\u015flem yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 bilinen bir ger\u00e7ek olmakla birlikte, taraflar\u0131n kendi i\u00e7 ili\u015fkilerinde ya da vekil eliyle i\u015flem yapan sat\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n kendi vekiliyle olan i\u00e7 ili\u015fkisinde d\u00fczenleyecekleri belge ya da ibranamede pek do\u011fald\u0131r ki g\u00f6sterilecek olan bedel, ger\u00e7ek al\u0131m sat\u0131m bedeli olacakt\u0131r. Daha y\u00fcksek bir bedel \u00f6dedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcren ki\u015finin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bir bedel \u00fczerinden ibra belgesi d\u00fczenlemesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. B\u00f6yle bir durum ibran\u0131n hukuki mahiyetine ters oldu\u011fu gibi hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na da ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/span> <strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Di\u011fer taraftan, davac\u0131 tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 ile<\/span> ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f tarihinden sonra aradan\u00a0uzunca\u00a0bir\u00a0s\u00fcre\u00a0ge\u00e7mesine kar\u015f\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n konutta oturmaya devam etmesi, kay\u0131t maliki olan daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;in bu duruma ses \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmayarak kendisinden herhangi bir bedel\u00a0istememesi<\/strong>, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz vergilerinin davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6denmeye devam olunmas\u0131 ve yine ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ger\u00e7ek de\u011feri ile resmi akitte g\u00f6sterilen bedel aras\u0131nda fahi\u015f fark bulunmas\u0131 olgular\u0131 bir arada de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n vekil taraf\u0131ndan vekalet yetkisi k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmak ve davac\u0131 zararland\u0131r\u0131lmak suretiyle el ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde hareket eden di\u011fer daval\u0131ya aktar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7 ve kanaatine ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">E. 2013\/21839<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">K. 2014\/11908<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T. 17.6.2014<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<div dir=\"auto\">Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre kamu d\u00fczeni ile ilgili bulundu\u011fundan mahkemece, <strong>davan\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda taraflar\u0131n ileri s\u00fcrmesine gerek kalmadan resen g\u00f6zetilmesi gerekti\u011fi ku\u015fkusuzdur.<\/strong> Ne var ki, mahkemece bu y\u00f6nde <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme <\/strong><\/span>yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2010\/2504<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2010\/3836<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 5.4.2010<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n<div dir=\"auto\">Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131lardan Elmas ve Ay\u015fe&#8217;nin \u015ei\u015fli 5. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 2001\/1427 Esas, 2002\/1645 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 dava dosyas\u0131nda, ayn\u0131 hukuksal sebeplerle dava a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 ve davan\u0131n 03.12.2002 tarihli kararla a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, bu davada yer alan di\u011fer davac\u0131lar\u0131n da, an\u0131lan davan\u0131n davac\u0131lar\u0131ndan Elmas&#8217;\u0131n \u00e7ocuklar\u0131 oldu\u011fu <strong>ve durumu bilmemelerine olanak bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong> dosya kapsam\u0131 ile sabittir.\u00a0Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere, <strong>S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin konusu, niteli\u011fi ve \u00f6denecek miktar gibi hususlarda dikkatsizli\u011fi veya bilgisizli\u011fi sonucu ger\u00e7ek iradesine uymayan beyanda bulunmak suretiyle<\/strong> esasl\u0131 hataya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda esasl\u0131 hatan\u0131n tan\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, 24. maddede s\u0131n\u0131rlay\u0131c\u0131 olmamak \u00fczere \u00f6rnekler g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. K\u0131saca i\u00e7 irade ile a\u00e7\u0131klanan irade aras\u0131ndaki <strong>bilmeyerek<\/strong> yap\u0131lan uyumsuzluk olarak tan\u0131mlanan hatan\u0131n esasl\u0131 kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in, uygulamada ve bilimsel alanda ortakla\u015fa benimsendi\u011fi gibi, giri\u015filen taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn ba\u015fl\u0131ca sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi, daha a\u00e7\u0131k s\u00f6yleyi\u015fle hem yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, y\u00f6n\u00fcnden (S\u00fcbjektif unsur), hem de i\u015f hayat\u0131ndaki d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131 (objektif unsur) a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan, hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmese idi b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hi\u00e7 veya a\u00e7\u0131klanan bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">E. 2016\/14615<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">K. 2020\/289<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T. 20.1.2020<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<div dir=\"auto\">Toplanan deliller ve t\u00fcm dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, <strong>temlikin iradi\u00a0oldu\u011fu, tapu\u00a0memuru \u00f6n\u00fcnde d\u00fczenlenen akdin resmi nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131, resmi akitteki bedelin farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131n ancak ayn\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7teki ba\u015fka bir delille kan\u0131tlanabilece\u011fi,<\/strong> davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n bu nitelikte bir delil ibraz edemedi\u011fi g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde davan\u0131n reddedilmi\u015f olmas\u0131nda bir isabetsizlik yoktur. As\u0131l ve birle\u015ftirilen davada davac\u0131lar\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden Reddine<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">E. 2017\/1-2144<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">K. 2019\/994<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<h6 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T. 3.10.2019<\/span><\/strong><\/h6>\n<div dir=\"auto\">Dava,\u00a0tapu\u00a0iptali ve tescil iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir. Davadan feragat, kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm gibi hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furur. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, davadan feragat ile dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k esastan sona ermi\u015f olur. Bu nedenle mahkeme hen\u00fcz feragat nedeniyle davan\u0131n reddine karar vermemi\u015f olsa bile davac\u0131 feragatten d\u00f6nemez; feragati ile ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Belirtmek gerekir ki <strong>feragat, \u0131slah yolu ile de h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz k\u0131l\u0131namaz. Ancak irade bozuklu\u011fu h\u00e2llerinde feragatin iptali istenebilir<\/strong> ( HMK. m.\u00a0311\u00a0). \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc, bir hukuki i\u015flemin ge\u00e7erli ve amac\u0131na uygun hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in o hukuki i\u015flemi yapan ki\u015fi veya ki\u015filerin sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde olu\u015fmu\u015f iradelerinin bulunmas\u0131 ve yine bu iradelerinin istenilen hukuki sonuca uygun \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Somut olayda ise davac\u0131 feragat dilek\u00e7esindeki imzan\u0131n kendisine ait olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu durumda feragat dilek\u00e7esi hakk\u0131nda bir karar verilebilmesi i\u00e7in imza incelemesi yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunludur. Yerel mahkemece feragat dilek\u00e7esindeki imzan\u0131n davac\u0131ya ait olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n\u00a0163.\u00a0maddesi gere\u011fince davada \u00f6n sorun olarak incelenmesi ve has\u0131l olacak sonuca g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2022\/4468<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2022\/7699<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 23.11.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Antalya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 29.03.2022 tarihli ve 2021\/1150 Esas, 2022\/466 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla, davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 ger\u00e7ekten satma iradesinin bulundu\u011fu, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinin tapuda i\u015flem yap\u0131l\u0131rken \u00f6denece\u011finin kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, tapuda devir i\u015fleminin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi, <strong>i\u015flem sonras\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6denece\u011finin s\u00f6ylendi\u011fi, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinin davac\u0131ya \u00f6denmedi\u011fi,<\/strong> davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131lar, daval\u0131lar\u0131n akrabas\u0131 olan daval\u0131lar ad\u0131na tapuda i\u015flem yapan vekil, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 i\u00e7in arac\u0131l\u0131k eden daval\u0131lar\u0131n akrabas\u0131 olan &#8230; ve &#8230; hesab\u0131na para g\u00f6nderen yine daval\u0131lar\u0131n akrabas\u0131 olan &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan yan\u0131lt\u0131larak hileli davran\u0131\u015flara maruz b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinin davac\u0131ya \u00f6denmedi\u011fi, ilk derece mahkemesince verilen kararda usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir husus bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle daval\u0131lar vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. (onama)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2014\/5682<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2015\/4883<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 07.04.2015<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Hemen belirtilmelidir ki, sat\u0131\u015f bedeli (semen) sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n asli unsurlar\u0131ndan birisidir.<\/strong> <strong>Semen \u00f6denece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi uyand\u0131r\u0131larak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin naklinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ve ondan sonra semenin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 yukar\u0131da de\u011finilen ilkeler g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde iradeyi fesada u\u011fratan sebeplerin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finin kabul\u00fcn\u00fc gerektirir.<\/strong> <strong>Bir ba\u015fka ifade ile, elbetteki taraflarca bedelin yani semenin sonra \u00f6denece\u011fi kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilir. B\u00f6ylesi bir durumda Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 893. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca sat\u0131\u015f bedeli \u00fczerinden ipotek yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulundu\u011fu gibi, T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 246. maddesi delaletiyle 235. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince bedel \u00f6denmedi\u011fi takdirde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin iade edilece\u011fine dair ihtirazi kay\u0131t konulabilir. B\u00f6ylesi bir olgu tapunun iptali ile eski malike intikaline olanak sa\u011flar ise de, ko\u015fulsuz olarak bedelin sonradan \u00f6denmesi taraflarca kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de sat\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n hakk\u0131 bedel olup \u00f6denmemesi halinde yasal yollara m\u00fcracaat ederek tahsili sa\u011flanabilece\u011finden \u00f6dememe tapu iptal ve tescilin hukuki nedenini te\u015fkil etmez.<\/strong> <strong>Oysa somut olayda bedelin ileriki tarihlerde \u00f6denece\u011fine dair taraflar aras\u0131nda bir anla\u015fma bulunmamakta hemen \u00f6denece\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde davac\u0131larda bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131r\u0131larak kay\u0131t maliki bir oldu bittiye getirilerek temlikin sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131 da a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/strong> Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken delillerin takdirinde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2016\/4714<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2019\/6184<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 02.12.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, sat\u0131\u015f bedeli (semen) sat\u0131\u015f akdinin asli unsurlar\u0131ndan birisidir. <strong>Ancak sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptal nedeni de\u011fildir.<\/strong> Somut olayda, davac\u0131n\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f iradesinin bulundu\u011fu, hatta temlikten bir g\u00fcn \u00f6nce emlak al\u0131m sat\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, <strong>sat\u0131\u015f bedeline kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k davac\u0131ya pe\u015finat \u00f6dendi\u011fi ve kalan k\u0131s\u0131m i\u00e7in verilen bonolar\u0131n<\/strong> davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan icra takibine konu edildi\u011fi, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n, sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin tamamen \u00f6denmemesinden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, davac\u0131 &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan kay\u0131t maliki daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019e kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan iptal tescil istekli birle\u015ftirilen davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2016\/8343<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2019\/2469<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 08.04.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 ger\u00e7ekten satma iradesinin bulundu\u011fu emlak s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi d\u00fczenlenerek kaporo verildi\u011fi bakiye bedelin tapuda i\u015flem s\u0131ras\u0131nda \u00f6denece\u011finin kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, tapuya i\u015flem i\u00e7in gidilirken daval\u0131n\u0131n e\u015finin sat\u0131\u015f bedelini kendisinde oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyerek intikal i\u015fleminin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi, i\u015flem sonras\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6denece\u011fini s\u00f6ylendi\u011fi ancak \u00f6demedi\u011finin tan\u0131k anlat\u0131lmalar\u0131yla tespit edildi\u011fi davac\u0131n\u0131n hileli davran\u0131\u015flarla aldat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bedelini almadan temlik etti\u011fi, <strong>akdin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 odan\u0131n kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131nda daval\u0131n\u0131n semeni \u00f6dedi\u011finin g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi,<\/strong> akit tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n da semenin \u00f6denmedi\u011fini beyan ettikleri, her ne kadar daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan <strong>sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6dendi\u011fi belirtmi\u015f ise de, bunun yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir belge ile kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Hemen belirtilmelidir ki, sat\u0131\u015f bedeli (semen) sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n asli unsurlar\u0131ndan birisidir. <strong>Semen \u00f6denece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi uyand\u0131r\u0131larak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin naklinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ve ondan sonra semenin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 yukar\u0131da de\u011finilen ilkeler g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde iradeyi fesada u\u011fratan sebeplerin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finin kabul\u00fcn\u00fc gerektirir. Bir ba\u015fka ifade ile, elbetteki taraflarca bedelin yani semenin sonra \u00f6denece\u011fi kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilir. B\u00f6ylesi bir durumda Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 893. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca sat\u0131\u015f bedeli \u00fczerinden ipotek tesisi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulundu\u011fu gibi, Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 217. maddesi delaletiyle 211. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince bedel \u00f6denmedi\u011fi takdirde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin iade edilece\u011fine dair ihtirazi kay\u0131t konulabilir. B\u00f6ylesi bir olgu tapunun iptali ile eski malike intikaline olanak sa\u011flar ise de, ko\u015fulsuz olarak bedelin sonradan \u00f6denmesi taraflarca kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise sat\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n hakk\u0131 bedel olup, \u00f6denmemesi halinde yasal yollara m\u00fcracaat ederek tahsili sa\u011flanabilece\u011finden \u00f6dememe tapu iptal ve tescilin hukuki nedenini te\u015fkil etmez.<\/strong> <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Oysa somut olayda; bedelin ileri tarihlerde \u00f6denece\u011fine dair taraflar aras\u0131nda bir anla\u015fma bulunmamakta,<\/span> hemen \u00f6denece\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde<\/strong> davac\u0131da bir kan\u0131 uyand\u0131r\u0131larak kay\u0131t maliki bir oldu bittiye getirilerek temlikin sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. \u00d6yleyse, davac\u0131n\u0131n hileye maruz b\u0131rak\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyebilme olana\u011f\u0131 yoktur. Ayr\u0131ca, bedelin \u00f6denmedi\u011fi di\u011fer deliller ile kan\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f iken, mahkemece yemin deliline dayan\u0131larak esas hakk\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken, yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">4721 say\u0131l\u0131 TMK\u2019n\u0131n 6. maddesinde; \u2018\u2019 Kanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. \u2018\u2019, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 190\/1. maddesinde; \u2018\u2019 \u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, kanunda \u00f6zel bir d\u00fczenleme bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, iddia edilen vak\u0131aya ba\u011flanan hukuki sonu\u00e7tan kendi lehine hak \u00e7\u0131karan tarafa aittir. \u2018\u2019 d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>11. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2020\/2881<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2020\/5307<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 23.11.2020<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">As\u0131l ve birle\u015fen davada\u00a0\u0130ntifa Hakk\u0131\u00a0Tesisi Vaadi S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi Yat\u0131r\u0131m Hakk\u0131nda Protokol akdedildi\u011fi, ta\u015f\u0131nmazda davac\u0131 akaryak\u0131t \u015firketi lehine\u00a0intifa\u00a0hakk\u0131\u00a0tesis edildi\u011fi, bayilik s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ve \u00e7er\u00e7eve anla\u015fma akdedildi\u011fi, daval\u0131 akaryak\u0131t \u015firketinin bayi konumunda oldu\u011fu, taraflar aras\u0131nda m\u00fcnakit 5 y\u0131ll\u0131k bayilik s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi s\u00fcresi dolmadan \u00e7ekilen ihtar ile\u00a0\u0130ntifa Hakk\u0131\u00a0ve sair s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin haks\u0131z ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak ge\u00e7ersiz oldu\u011fu iddia edildi\u011fi davada davac\u0131-birle\u015fen daval\u0131 akaryak\u0131t \u015firketi irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine dayanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tan\u0131klar dinlenerek irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015fse de, <em><strong>bir davada ayn\u0131 anda hata,\u00a0hile\u00a0ve korkutma sebeplerine dayanmak \u00e7eli\u015fkili beyanda bulunma yasa\u011f\u0131na girdi\u011finden kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131ya s\u00fcre verilerek irade sakatl\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedenlerinden hangisine dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klatt\u0131r\u0131larak<\/strong><\/em> buna g\u00f6re deliller toplan\u0131p karar verilmesi gerekir. Di\u011fer yandan 13.09.2010 tarihli s\u00f6zle\u015fmede iradesinin sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden davac\u0131-birle\u015fen daval\u0131n\u0131n 11.03.2013 tarihli ilk ihtar\u0131nda bundan hi\u00e7 bahsetmemi\u015f olmas\u0131, m\u00fcteakiben 14.04.2013 tarihli ihtarda dile getirmi\u015ftir. Taraf 1 y\u0131l i\u00e7inde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011funu bildirmezse s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 kalaca\u011f\u0131ndan hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc d\u00fczenlemesi g\u00f6zetilmeden karar verilmesi hatal\u0131 olmu\u015ftur.<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>DOKUZUNCU HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2010\/42059<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2013\/3846<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 31.01.2013<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olayda Mahkemece kesin yemin deliline dayan\u0131larak davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f ise de bu yemin HUMK 344 vd. maddelerine uygun de\u011fildir. <strong>\u0130spat k\u00fclfeti kendisinde olmayan taraf\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa y\u00f6neltti\u011fi yemin hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmaz. Kesin yemin, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendisine d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n davan\u0131n haline etkili bir vak\u0131an\u0131n ispat\u0131 i\u00e7in di\u011fer tarafa teklif etti\u011fi yemin olup,<\/strong> 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 344 ve devam\u0131 maddelerinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Yemin teklif edecek taraf, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendisine d\u00fc\u015fen fakat iddias\u0131n\u0131 veya savunmas\u0131n\u0131 ispat edememi\u015f olan taraft\u0131r. \u0130\u015f\u00e7inin \u00fccretinin \u00f6dendi\u011finin ispat\u0131 daval\u0131 i\u015fverene aittir. \u00dccretin \u00f6dendi\u011fi yolunda ispat k\u00fclfeti kendisinde olmayan davac\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7inin daval\u0131 i\u015fverene y\u00f6neltti\u011fi \u00f6demeye ili\u015fkin yemin teklifi kesin yemin niteli\u011finde olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle hukuki bir sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmaz. Mahkemece bu maddi ve hukuki olgular dikkate al\u0131nmaks\u0131z\u0131n \u00f6deme olgusunun ispat edilememesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fccret alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekirken davac\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayan ge\u00e7ersiz yemin teklifinden bahisle davan\u0131n reddi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2013\/18933<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2014\/3343<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 04.03.2014<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u00d6te yandan, yemin, en son (\u00e7are) olarak ba\u015fvurulacak bir ispat vas\u0131tas\u0131d\u0131r. Mahkemece; ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendine d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u0131n iddias\u0131n\u0131 veya savunmas\u0131n\u0131 (ba\u015fka delillerle) ispat edemedi\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131rsa, tarafa bu hususu a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a bildirmek suretiyle, kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa yemin teklif etme hakk\u0131 bulundu\u011funu hat\u0131rlatmal\u0131d\u0131r. Taraflar\u0131n sundu\u011fu deliller yeterince de\u011ferlendirilip tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmadan, bu a\u015famada davac\u0131 tarafa yemin teklif etme hakk\u0131n\u0131n hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmas\u0131 ve davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n yemin teklifinde bulunmamas\u0131 da, davac\u0131y\u0131 ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olmay\u0131p; davac\u0131n\u0131n davas\u0131n\u0131 ispat edemedi\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmez. Farkl\u0131 hukuksal sebeplere dayal\u0131 davalar\u0131n eldeki davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne gerek\u00e7e yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131, Muvazaa iddias\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flemin iradi olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011finin, ba\u015fka bir ifade ile istenerek yarat\u0131lan irade bozuklu\u011fu hali oldu\u011fu, hata-hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n ise istenmeden olu\u015fan ve i\u015flemin iradi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131na dayal\u0131 hal oldu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde, bu y\u00f6n\u00fcyle de an\u0131lan davadaki karar\u0131n eldeki davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne gerek\u00e7e yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu-HMK md 225 vd.uyar\u0131nca, \u00fczerine ispat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u00e7a di\u011fer tarafa yemin teklif edilebilece\u011fi, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc davac\u0131 tarafa d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc halde, daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a teklif edilen yeminin davac\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan oturumda eda ettikleri, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendisine d\u00fc\u015fmeyen taraf\u00e7a teklif edilen yeminin eda edilmi\u015f olsa bile sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131&#8230; <em>1.HD.04.04.2013,14534\/4908<\/em><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015fen taraf, dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 di\u011fer deliller toplanmaks\u0131z\u0131n delillerini yemine hasrederek bu delili kullan\u0131r ise, teklif edilen yeminin kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u00e7a yerine getirilmesi halinde kesin delil ortaya \u00e7\u0131kaca\u011f\u0131ndan, yemin teklif eden taraf\u0131n yeminin hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131na katlanmak zorunda oldu\u011fu, bu a\u015famadan sonra yemin teklifinden d\u00f6n\u00fclmesinin ve yeni delillerin ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmayaca\u011f\u0131&#8230;<em>HGK.10.06.2015 T.13-37\/1525<\/em><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f oldu\u011fu, akrabal\u0131k veya di\u011fer bir yak\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir sebep say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131&#8230;<em>2.HD.10.11.2015 T.6943\/20901<\/em><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u00dczerine ispat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc d\u00fc\u015fen taraf\u00e7a di\u011fer tarafa yemin teklif edilebilece\u011fi, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc davac\u0131 tarafa d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc halde daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a teklif edilen yeminin davac\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan 07.12.2011 tarihli oturumda eda ettikleri, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendisine d\u00fc\u015fmeyen taraf\u00e7a teklif edilen yeminin eda edilmi\u015f olsa bile sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131&#8230;<em> 1.HD.15.11.2016 T.15218\/10362<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2020\/6544<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/8652<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 20.09.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 74. maddesine g\u00f6re; &#8220;Hakim, zarar verenin kusurunun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ay\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar verirken, ceza hukukunun sorumlulukla ilgili h\u00fck\u00fcmleriyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, ceza hakimi taraf\u0131ndan verilen beraat karar\u0131yla da ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde, ceza h\u00e2kiminin kusurun de\u011ferlendirilmesine ve zarar\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131 da, hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamaz.&#8221; Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla <strong>ceza mahkemesince verilen beraat karar\u0131; kusur ve derecesi, zarar tutar\u0131, temyiz g\u00fcc\u00fc ve y\u00fckletilme yeterli\u011fi, illiyet gibi esaslar\u0131n hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamayacakt\u0131r<\/strong>. Ancak hemen belirtilmelidir ki, gerek \u00f6\u011fretide gerekse Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n yerle\u015fmi\u015f i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda, ceza hakiminin tespit etti\u011fi maddi olaylarla ve \u00f6zellikle \u201cfiilin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d konusu ile hukuk h\u00e2kiminin tamamen ba\u011fl\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmektedir. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, <strong>maddi olaylar\u0131 ve yasak eylemlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 saptayan ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131, taraflar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kesin delil niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131yacakt\u0131r. Bu do\u011frultuda maddi vak\u0131an\u0131n tespitine ili\u015fkin ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olup<\/strong> ceza mahkemesince bir maddi vak\u0131an\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da yoklu\u011fu konusundaki kesinle\u015fmi\u015f kabule ra\u011fmen, ayn\u0131 konunun hukuk mahkemesinde yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir (Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 2017\/11-92 E 2018\/1362 K say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131).&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2016\/17962<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2018\/7972<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 25.06.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;H\u00e2kim, zarar verenin kusurunun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ay\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar verirken, ceza hukukunun sorumlulukla ilgili h\u00fck\u00fcmleriyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, ceza h\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan verilen beraat karar\u0131yla da ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde, ceza h\u00e2kiminin kusurun de\u011ferlendirilmesine ve zarar\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131 da, hukuk h\u00e2kimini ba\u011flamaz (TBK m.74). Bu a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fck\u00fcm kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, ceza mahkemesince verilen, beraat karar\u0131, kusur ve derecesi, zarar tutar\u0131, temyiz g\u00fcc\u00fc ve y\u00fckletilme yeterli\u011fi, illiyet gibi esaslar\u0131n hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 konusunda duraksama bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak, hemen belirtilmelidir ki, gerek \u00f6\u011fretide ve gerekse Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n yerle\u015fmi\u015f i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda, ceza hakiminin tespit etti\u011fi maddi olaylarla ve \u00f6zellikle \u201cfiilin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d konusu ile hukuk hakiminin tamamen ba\u011fl\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmektedir. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, <strong>maddi olaylar\u0131 veya yasak eylemlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 saptayan ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131, taraflar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kesin delil niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131r<\/strong>. Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n yerle\u015fik uygulamas\u0131na ve \u00f6\u011fretideki genel kabule g\u00f6re, <strong>maddi olgunun tespitine ili\u015fkin ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flar.<\/strong> Ceza mahkemesinde bir maddi olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da yoklu\u011fu konusundaki kesinle\u015fmi\u015f kabule ra\u011fmen, ayn\u0131 konunun hukuk mahkemesinde yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir <em>(Yarg\u0131tay HGK. E.2013\/4-1008-K.2014\/490).&#8221;<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2010\/9419<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2010\/11155<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 28.10.2010<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131 as\u0131l davas\u0131nda 24 ada 53 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki 1\/2 pay\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akdi ile daval\u0131ya temlik etti\u011fini <strong>zannederken <\/strong>daval\u0131n\u0131n bak\u0131m y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmemesi \u00fczerine akdi feshetme haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda tapuda an\u0131lan i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n kendisinin <strong>ya\u015fl\u0131<\/strong> ve <strong>cahil olmas\u0131<\/strong>, T\u00fcrk\u00e7e bilmemesinden yararland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve <strong>hile<\/strong> ile akdin yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, akitte \u015fekli ve maddi unsurlar\u0131n da ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, hata ve hile nedeniyle tapu iptali, bozma sonras\u0131 birle\u015fen davas\u0131nda ise, tapu iptali ve tescil iste\u011finde bulunmu\u015ftur. Somut olaya gelince; mahkemece yap\u0131lan ara\u015ft\u0131rma, inceleme ve \u00f6zellikle akdin yap\u0131l\u0131\u015f\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunup, <strong>akdi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren ve tarafs\u0131z tan\u0131k olan tapu memurunun olaylara dayal\u0131 \u201c\u2026sat\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde i\u015flem yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flemin sat\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu bildi\u011fini, davac\u0131ya sat\u0131\u015f sonucunda paras\u0131n\u0131 al\u0131p almad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n soruldu\u011funu ve davac\u0131n\u0131n da paray\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etti\u011fini, tapu m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn de davac\u0131ya ad\u0131n\u0131, soyad\u0131n\u0131 ve tapuya ni\u00e7in geldi\u011fini sordu\u011funu ve bu \u015fekilde akdin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini\u2026\u201d ifade etmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, dinlenilen di\u011fer tan\u0131klar\u0131n davac\u0131 Nazire\u2019nin yak\u0131nlar\u0131 oldu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde tarafs\u0131z tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na itibar edilmesi gerekece\u011fi ku\u015fkusuzdur. Bu bildirimler ve beyan g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde, akit an\u0131nda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akdi ile de\u011fil de sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na davac\u0131n\u0131n o anda muttali oldu\u011fu kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">T<\/strong><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">.C.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2013\/4800<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2014\/2194<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 11.02.2014<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131, maliki oldu\u011fu 35 no&#8217;lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn devri i\u00e7in anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, ancak tapuda iradesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak 37 no&#8217;lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn daval\u0131ya temlikinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bu hususu da sonra \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, eldeki davay\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <strong>Hata iddias\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/strong>, \u00f6nce kirac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte g\u00f6zetilerek davan\u0131n hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131p a\u00e7\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, sonra esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden taraf delillerinin eksiksiz toplanmas\u0131 <strong>\u00f6zellikle\u00a0tapu\u00a0talep\u00a0formu<\/strong> ve ibraz edilen kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin irdelenmesi, gerekir ise daval\u0131 ile 35 no&#8217;lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn kiralanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak yap\u0131lan kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki ink\u00e2r edilen imzan\u0131n aidiyeti y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Adli T\u0131p Kurumu arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla inceleme yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bozulmu\u015ftur. <strong>Bozma ilam\u0131na uyulmakla bozma lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na us\u00fbli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011far<\/strong>. Mahkemece, bozma ilam\u0131 do\u011frultusunda i\u015flem yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunlu hale gelir.<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2018\/2817<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2019\/3208<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 22.05.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olaya gelince; \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bir ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcmd\u00fcr. Ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcmde s\u0131\u011f\u0131na\u011f\u0131n (ki s\u0131\u011f\u0131nak binan\u0131n ortak alan\u0131d\u0131r) ta\u015f\u0131nmaza dahil olmayaca\u011f\u0131 <strong>herkes\u00e7e bilinen bir durumdur<\/strong>. <strong>Tapu\u00a0 \u00f6n\u00fcnde i\u015flem yap\u0131l\u0131rken de 1 no&#8217;lu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn \u00bd pay\u0131n\u0131n temlikinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 davac\u0131ya okunmu\u015ftur.<\/strong> Bu durumda s\u0131\u011f\u0131na\u011f\u0131 temlik etti\u011fi zann\u0131na kap\u0131lmas\u0131 <strong>dinlenebilir bir iddia de\u011fildir.<\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas: 2018\/3340<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar: 2018\/13453<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih: 15.10.2018<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130ddian\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f bi\u00e7imine ve \u00f6zellikle talimat yoluyla<strong> i\u015flemlerini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren tan\u0131k<\/strong> olarak dinlenen ve tapu &#8230;&#8217;in, davac\u0131n\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f s\u0131ras\u0131nda babas\u0131ndan kalan pay\u0131n devrini ama\u00e7lad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak kendisini tam tapu memuru ifade edemedi\u011fi i\u00e7in t\u00fcm pay\u0131n daval\u0131ya devredildi\u011fi ve tapuda devir i\u015flemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftikten sonra bunu \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi i\u00e7in herhangi bir i\u015flem yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ifade etti\u011fi \u00fczere, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcnde ve olarak iptali ile tescil karar\u0131 verilmesinde bir isabetsizlik yoktur.<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2022\/5228<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2023\/1380<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih: 09.03.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n, eylem ve i\u015flemlerinin sebep ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 anlayabilme, de\u011ferlendirebilme ve ay\u0131rt edebilme kudreti (g\u00fcc\u00fc) bulunmayan bir kimsenin kendi iradesi ile hak kurabilme, bor\u00e7 (y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck) alt\u0131na girebilme ehliyetinden s\u00f6z edilemez. Nitekim T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) \u201cFiil ehliyetine sahip olan kimse, kendi fiilleriyle hak edinebilir ve bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na girebilir\u201d bi\u00e7imindeki 9. maddesi, \u015fahs\u0131n hak elde edebilmesi, bor\u00e7 (y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck) alt\u0131na girebilmesi, fiil ehliyetine ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f. 10. maddesi de, fiil ehliyetinin ba\u015fl\u0131ca ko\u015fulu olarak ay\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc ile ergin (&#8230;) olmay\u0131 kabul ederek \u201cAy\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcne sahip ve k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 olmayan her ergin ki\u015finin fiil ehliyeti vard\u0131r.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc getirmi\u015ftir. <strong>\u201cAy\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fc\u201d<\/strong> eylem ve i\u015flem ehliyeti olarak da tarif edilerek, ayn\u0131 Yasa&#8217;n\u0131n 13. maddesinde \u201cYa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fckl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00fcz\u00fcnden veya ak\u0131l hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131, ak\u0131l zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131, sarho\u015fluk ya da bunlara benzer sebeplerden biriyle akla uygun bi\u00e7imde davranma yetene\u011finden yoksun olmayan herkes bu kanuna g\u00f6re ay\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcne sahiptir.\u201d denmek suretiyle a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015f, ayr\u0131ca ay\u0131rt\u0131m g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fc ortadan kald\u0131ran \u00f6nemli nedenlerden baz\u0131lar\u0131na de\u011finilmi\u015ftir. \u00d6nemlerinden dolay\u0131 bu ilkeler, s\u00f6z konusu yasa ile \u00f6teki yasalar\u0131n \u00e7e\u015fitli h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinde de yer alm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r. Bu durumda, taraflar\u0131n g\u00f6sterecekleri, t\u00fcm delillerin toplan\u0131lmas\u0131 tan\u0131klardan bu y\u00f6nde a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131, doyurucu somut bilgiler al\u0131nmas\u0131, varsa ehliyetsiz oldu\u011fu iddia edilen ki\u015fiye ait doktor raporlar\u0131, hasta g\u00f6zlem (m\u00fc\u015fahede) ka\u011f\u0131tlar\u0131, film grafilerinin eksiksiz getirtilmesi zorunludur. Bunun yan\u0131nda, her ne kadar 6100 s. Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 282. maddesinde belirtildi\u011fi gibi bilirki\u015finin \u201coy ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u201d hakimi ba\u011flamaz ise de, temyiz kudretinin yoklu\u011fu, ya\u015f k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fckl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, ak\u0131l hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131, ak\u0131l zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131, sarho\u015fluk gibi salt biyolojik nedenlere de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda bilin\u00e7, idrak, irade gibi psikolojik unsurlara da ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, ak\u0131l hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131, ak\u0131l zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi biyolojik ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 psikolojik nedenlerin belirlenmesi, \u00e7ok zaman hakimlik mesle\u011finin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda \u00f6zel ve teknik bilgi gerektirmektedir. Hele ay\u0131rt etme g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn nispi bir kavram olmas\u0131 ki\u015fiye eylem ve i\u015fleme g\u00f6re de\u011fi\u015fmesi bu y\u00f6nde <strong>en yetkili sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulundan, \u00f6zellikle Adli T\u0131p Kurumu D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc \u0130htisas Dairesinden rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 da gerekli k\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Esasen TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 409\/2. maddesi ak\u0131l hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya ak\u0131l zay\u0131fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bilirki\u015fi raporu ile belirlenece\u011fini \u00f6ng\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<h4 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>(HGK-K.2022\/15)<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 53. maddesine g\u00f6re ceza mahkemesinin kusur oran\u0131 ile ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011filse de ceza mahkemesinde belirlenen olgu hukuk h\u00e2kimini ba\u011flar. Bir ba\u015fka anlat\u0131mla ceza mahkemesinde kusurun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin maddi olgu hukuk h\u00e2kimini ba\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131ndan, kesinle\u015fen ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 ile mahk\u00fbm olanlara kusur verilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bununla birlikte hukuk h\u00e2kimi, ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kusurunun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin yap\u0131lan tespitle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir; ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kusurlu oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin yap\u0131lan tespitle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Zira her ne kadar kusura ili\u015fkin saptama ceza h\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa da ceza hukukunda kusura ili\u015fkin kurallar, \u00f6zel hukuka g\u00f6re daha s\u0131k\u0131 olarak tespit edildi\u011fi i\u00e7in ceza h\u00e2kimi kusurun mevcudiyetini bir kez tespit etti\u011finde bu maddi olgu art\u0131k hukuk h\u00e2kimini ba\u011flar <em>(Tando\u011fan\/s.352).<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u00d6ncelikle belirtmek gerekir ki; \u201cKurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda hukuksal bir sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmamas\u0131n\u0131\u201d ifade eden <strong>h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 kurumu (HAGB),<\/strong> davay\u0131 sonu\u00e7land\u0131ran ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7\u00f6zen bir \u201ch\u00fck\u00fcm\u201d de\u011fildir. Bunun sonucu olarak, h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin kararlar, CMK\u2019n\u0131n 223. maddesinde say\u0131lan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerden olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, bu t\u00fcr kararlar\u0131n yasa yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131 durumunda yarg\u0131laman\u0131n tekrarlanmas\u0131 yasa\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin kurallar uygulanamayaca\u011f\u0131 gibi, davan\u0131n esas\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7\u00f6zen bir karar bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in verilecek h\u00fck\u00fcm veya kararlarda lehe ve aleyhe sonu\u00e7tan da s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir <em>(Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunun 03.05.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/4-61 E., 2011\/79 K.; 06.10.2009 tarihli ve 2009\/4-169 E., 2009\/223 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Daval\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ceza mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f olup, yukar\u0131da yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalar uyar\u0131nca h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 karar\u0131 maddi olgu y\u00f6n\u00fcyle kesin bir mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ancak kusurun Yarg\u0131tay a\u015famas\u0131nda verildi\u011fi ve mahkemece bozmaya uyulmakla kusurun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin maddi olgunun kesinle\u015fti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bu husus hukuk h\u00e2kimi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olacakt\u0131r.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>E. 2013\/4-1008<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>K. 2014\/490<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>T. 9.4.2014<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><span style=\"color: #800000;\">* CEZA MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARLARININ KES\u0130N DEL\u0130L N\u0130TEL\u0130\u011e\u0130<\/span> ( Haks\u0131z Fill Sebebiyle U\u011fran\u0131lan Zarar\u0131n Tazmini Talebi &#8211; Maddi Olaylar\u0131n ve \u00d6zellikle &#8220;Fiilin Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8221; Konusuyla Hukuk Hakiminin Tamamen Ba\u011fl\u0131 Olaca\u011f\u0131\/Maddi Olaylar\u0131 ve Yasak Eylemlerin Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 Saptayan Ceza Mahkemesi Karar\u0131n\u0131n Taraflar Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Kesin Delil Niteli\u011fini Ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><span style=\"color: #800000;\">* MANEV\u0130 TAZM\u0130NAT DAVASI<\/span> (Haks\u0131z Fiil\/Hakaret\/Ceza Hakiminin Tespit Etti\u011fi Maddi Olaylar\u0131n ve \u00d6zellikle &#8220;Fiilin Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8221; Konusuyla Hukuk Hakiminin Tamamen Ba\u011fl\u0131 Olaca\u011f\u0131 &#8211; Ayn\u0131 Konunun Hukuk Mahkemesinde Yeniden Tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131\/Ceza Davas\u0131n\u0131n Sonucunun Beklenmesi ve Sonucuna G\u00f6re Karar Verilmesi Gerekti\u011fi)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><span style=\"color: #800000;\">* HAKSIZ F\u0130\u0130L<\/span> (Ceza Hakiminin Tespit Etti\u011fi Maddi Olaylarla ve \u00d6zellikle Fiilin Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Konusuyla Hukuk Hakiminin Tamamen Ba\u011fl\u0131 Olaca\u011f\u0131\/Maddi Olaylar\u0131 ve Yasak Eylemlerin Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 Saptayan Ceza Mahkemesi Karar\u0131n\u0131n Taraflar Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Kesin Delil Niteli\u011fini Ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 &#8211; Ceza Davas\u0131n\u0131n Sonucunun Beklenmesi Gerekti\u011fi\/Manevi Tazminat)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><span style=\"color: #800000;\">* BEKLET\u0130C\u0130 MESELE<\/span> (Manevi Tazminat\/Davac\u0131lardan Birinin \u015eikayeti \u00dczerine Daval\u0131n\u0131n Hakaret Su\u00e7undan Dolay\u0131 Ceza Davas\u0131nda Yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Davan\u0131n Derdest Oldu\u011fu &#8211; Ceza Mahkemesince Verilecek Mahkumiyet Karar\u0131 Hukuk Hakimini Ba\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131ndan Mahkemece Ceza Davas\u0131n\u0131n Sonucunun Beklenmesi Gerekti\u011fi)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><span style=\"color: #800000;\">* CEZA MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARLARININ HUKUK HAK\u0130M\u0130N\u0130 BA\u011eLAMASI<\/span> (Maddi Olaylar\u0131n ve \u00d6zellikle &#8220;Fiilin Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8221; Konusuyla Hukuk Hakiminin Tamamen Ba\u011fl\u0131 Olaca\u011f\u0131\/Ayn\u0131 Konunun Hukuk Mahkemesinde Yeniden Tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 &#8211; Ceza Davas\u0131n\u0131n Sonucunun Beklenmesi ve Olu\u015facak Sonuca G\u00f6re Karar Verilmesi Gerekti\u011fi\/Manevi Tazminat)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>818\/m.53<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>6098\/m.74<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><b>\u00d6ZET :\u00a0<\/b><\/span>Dava; haks\u0131z fiil sebebiyle u\u011fran\u0131lan zarar\u0131n tazmini istemine ili\u015fkindir. Ceza mahkemesince verilen, beraat karar\u0131, kusur ve derecesi, zarar tutar\u0131, temyiz g\u00fcc\u00fc ve y\u00fckletilme yeterli\u011fi, illiyet gibi esaslar\u0131n hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 konusunda duraksama bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak, hemen belirtilmelidir ki, gerek \u00f6\u011fretide ve gerekse Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n yerle\u015fmi\u015f i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda, <strong>ceza hakiminin tespit etti\u011fi maddi olaylarla ve \u00f6zellikle &#8220;fiilin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131&#8221; konusuyla hukuk hakiminin tamamen ba\u011fl\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmektedir. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">maddi olaylar\u0131 ve yasak eylemlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 saptayan ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131,<\/span> taraflar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden kesin delil niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131r.<\/strong> Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n yerle\u015fik uygulamas\u0131na ve \u00f6\u011fretideki genel kabule g\u00f6re, maddi olgunun tespitine dair ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flar.<strong> Ceza mahkemesinde<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>bir maddi olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da yoklu\u011fu konusundaki kesinle\u015fmi\u015f kabu<\/strong><\/span>le <strong>ra\u011fmen, ayn\u0131 konunun hukuk mahkemesinde yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir.<\/strong> Davac\u0131lardan birinin \u015fikayeti \u00fczerine, daval\u0131n\u0131n hakaret su\u00e7undan dolay\u0131 ceza davas\u0131nda yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve davan\u0131n derdest oldu\u011fu dosyadaki bilgi ve belgelerden anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. 818 Say\u0131l\u0131 B.K.&#8217;nun 53. maddesi gere\u011fince ceza mahkemesince verilecek mahkumiyet karar\u0131n\u0131n hukuk hakimini ba\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131ndan, mahkemece, ceza davas\u0131n\u0131n sonucunun beklenmesi ve olu\u015facak sonuca g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekmektedir. <em>(Yarg\u0131tay H.G.K.&#8217;nun 10.1.975 g\u00fcn ve 1971\/406 E., 1975\/1 K.; H.G.K.&#8217;nun 23.1.1985 g\u00fcn ve 1983\/10-372 E., 1985\/21 K.; H.G.K.&#8217;nun 27.4.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2011\/17-50 E., 2011\/231 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilamlar\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Vurgulamakta yarar vard\u0131r ki, hukuk usul\u00fc bir \u015fekil hukukudur. Davan\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131, itirazlar\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, tan\u0131klar\u0131n ve di\u011fer delillerin bildirilmesi belirli s\u00fcre ko\u015fullar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, 2. tan\u0131k listesi verilememesi, iddia ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131 gibi, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n s\u00fcratle sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gayesiyle belirli k\u0131s\u0131tlamalar getirilmi\u015ftir. Bunun sonucunda, hukuk hakimi \u015fekli ger\u00e7e\u011fi arayacak, maddi ger\u00e7ek \u00f6ncelikli hedef olmayacakt\u0131r. Ancak ceza hakimi bunun tersine \u00f6ncelikli hedef olarak maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fe ula\u015fmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015facakt\u0131r. O halde ceza mahkemesinin maddi nedensellik ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131 (illiyet ili\u015fkisi) tespit eden kesinle\u015fmi\u015f h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamas\u0131na, 818 Say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 53. maddesi bir engel olu\u015fturmaz <em>(H.G.K.&#8217;nun 16.9.1981 g\u00fcn 1979\/1-131 E., 1981\/587 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131; M. \u00c7enberci, Hukuk Davalar\u0131nda Kesin H\u00fck\u00fcm, 1965, s.22 vd.; H.G.K.&#8217;nun 27.4.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2011\/17-50 E., 2011\/231 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n yerle\u015fik uygulamas\u0131na ve \u00f6\u011fretideki genel kabule g\u00f6re, maddi olgunun tespitine dair ceza mahkemesi karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flar. Ceza mahkemesinde bir maddi olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da yoklu\u011fu konusundaki kesinle\u015fmi\u015f kabule ra\u011fmen, ayn\u0131 konunun hukuk mahkemesinde yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir <em>(H.G.K.&#8217;nun 11.10.1989 g\u00fcn ve 1989\/11-373 E., 472 K.; H.G.K.&#8217;nun 27.4.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2011\/17-50 E., 2011\/231 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilamlar\u0131).<\/em><\/p>\n<h5 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay 14.Hukuk Dairesi 2015\/16954 E.2016\/7433 K. 22.09.2016 T.<\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dava, intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n terkini istemine ili\u015fkindir. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 794. maddesindeki tan\u0131ma g\u00f6re intifa hakk\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131n\u0131rlar, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar hatta haklar veya bir malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczerinde tesisi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan ve hak sahibine konusu olan \u015feyden yararlanma hakk\u0131 veren bir irtifak t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallar \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131, resmi senedin d\u00fczenlenerek tapuya tescili ile, ta\u015f\u0131n\u0131rlar \u00fczerinde ise ta\u015f\u0131n\u0131r e\u015fya zilyetli\u011finin intifa hakk\u0131 sahibine ge\u00e7irilmesiyle kurulur. Alacaklar \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131 ise; hakk\u0131n temliki, k\u0131ymetli evrak\u0131n teslimi suretiyle kurulabilir. (TMK.m.795) <span class=\"underline\">\u0130ntifa hakk\u0131; bir s\u00fcreyle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olarak kurulmu\u015fsa s\u00fcrenin dolmas\u0131 veya bu s\u00fcreden \u00f6nce intifa hakk\u0131 sahibinin hakk\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7mesi, intifa hakk\u0131 sahibinin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc veya t\u00fczelki\u015fi ise t\u00fczel ki\u015fili\u011fin sona ermesi, konusu olan \u015feyin b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle, harap olmas\u0131 sebebiyle art\u0131k ondan yararlanma olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kalmamas\u0131 durumlar\u0131nda sona erer (TMK.m.796). Ayr\u0131ca, intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n dan\u0131\u015f\u0131kl\u0131 kuruldu\u011fu iddias\u0131 veya iradeyi sakatlayan nedenlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 da ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek terkin iste\u011finde bulunulabilir. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununda m\u00fc\u015fterek m\u00fclkiyette payda\u015f olan ki\u015finin intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi gere\u011fi pay\u0131 \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131 kurabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Ancak payda\u015fa bu hak verilirken, pay\u0131 \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131 kurmas\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131n m\u00fclkiyet haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanmalar\u0131na zarar vermeyece\u011fi \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Di\u011fer taraftan intifa hakk\u0131 ile y\u00fckl\u00fc olarak bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n o ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal\u0131n de\u011ferini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrece\u011fi de bir ger\u00e7ektir. Uygulamada baz\u0131 payda\u015flar\u0131n hakl\u0131 ve ge\u00e7erli bir nedeni bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde di\u011fer payda\u015flar\u0131 zarara u\u011fratmak ve onlar\u0131 k\u00fclfet alt\u0131na sokmak i\u00e7in paylar\u0131 \u00fczerinde intifa hakk\u0131 tesis ettikleri g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. <\/span><span class=\"underline\">T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 2. maddesiyle getirtilen kural gere\u011fi herkes haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131rken d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na uymak zorundad\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda da, <em><strong>g\u00f6r\u00fclmekte olan dava s\u0131ras\u0131nda veya dava a\u00e7\u0131lmadan hemen \u00f6nce payda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi yarar\u0131na intifa hakk\u0131 tesisinin ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda talepleri azaltmak ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bir bedel kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n ele ge\u00e7irilmesini sa\u011flamak amac\u0131na y\u00f6nelik yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 karine olarak kabul edilmekte, di\u011fer payda\u015flar taraf\u0131ndan zarar g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n terkini istemli a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda, aksi hak sahibi taraf\u0131ndan kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece intifa hakk\u0131na dair i\u015flemin iptaline karar verilmektedir. <\/strong><\/em><\/span><span class=\"underline\">Dosyada mevcut kay\u0131t ve belgelere g\u00f6re taraflar\u0131n 13.07.1996 tarihinde evlendikleri ve 03.03.2009 g\u00fcnl\u00fc, mahkeme karar\u0131 ile bo\u015fand\u0131klar\u0131, 2000 do\u011fumlu m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocuk\u2026.velayetinin anne \u2026.erildi\u011fi, ayr\u0131ca taraflar ad\u0131na 1\/2 hisse olarak kay\u0131tl\u0131 bulunan L 4 blok, 1. kat, 1 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn bo\u015fanma tarihinden itibaren 5 y\u0131l s\u00fcre ile davac\u0131 \u2026 taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131n\u0131n herhangi bir hak talebi olmaks\u0131z\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 konusundaki anla\u015fman\u0131n mahkemece, uygun bulundu\u011fundan tasdikine dair karar verildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. <\/span>\u00d6te yandan taraflar aras\u0131nda haricen 24.09.2009 tarihli protokol d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Protokol i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re; yukarda s\u00f6z\u00fc edilen ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm \u00fczerine \u2026 lehine 200.000.000 TL bedel kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 15 y\u0131l s\u00fcreli intifa hakk\u0131 tesis edilecek ve intifa hakk\u0131 tesisinden sonra ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerinde mevcut 200.000.000 TL alacak i\u00e7in tesis edilen ipotek azami 3 g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde fek edilecektir. Dosyadaki mevcut delil durumuna g\u00f6re, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 \u2026\u2019a 200.000,00 TL borcu bulundu\u011fu bu borcunu \u00f6demedi\u011fi buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 sonucu verilen kararla 5 y\u0131l s\u00fcreli tan\u0131nan intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n protokol ile 15 y\u0131l s\u00fcreli olarak de\u011fi\u015ftirildi\u011fi ancak, resmi s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile s\u00fcresiz intifa hakk\u0131 tesis edildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan 21.02.2014 havale tarihli dilek\u00e7esinin 5 numaral\u0131 bendinde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a<span class=\"underline\">\u00a0<em><strong>\u201cher hangi bir hata, hile ikrah, tehdit, irade sakatlamas\u0131, sonucu olu\u015ftu\u011funa dair bir iddias\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0<\/span>ancak davan\u0131n konusu talebinin intifa hakk\u0131 devam ederken ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi sonu\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131nda sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemleri yap\u0131l\u0131rken,\u00a0<span class=\"underline\">hi\u00e7 kimsenin tasarruf edemedi\u011fi bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131n almak i\u00e7in te\u015febb\u00fcste bulunmayaca\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerindeki intifa hakk\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak do\u011fabilecek ma\u011fduriyetinin \u00f6nlenmesidir.\u201d a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 da dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131 sonucu verilecek kararla davac\u0131n\u0131n do\u011facak ma\u011fduriyetinin mahkeme arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile giderilip giderilmeyece\u011fi noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r. <\/span>Davac\u0131 hata, hile, ikrah olmadan resmi senedi imzalayarak daval\u0131 eski e\u015fe s\u00fcresiz intifa hakk\u0131 tan\u0131m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <strong>Resmi senette yer alan intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n terkini Kanun\u2019un 796. maddesinde yer alan ko\u015fullar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong> Somut olayda an\u0131lan ko\u015fullar ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmemi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan davac\u0131 yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ileride m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocuklar\u0131na kalaca\u011f\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle s\u00f6zle\u015fme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak, ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131yla kand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f ise de yukarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan maddi olaylar zinciri ve mevcut delil durumuna g\u00f6re davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n daval\u0131ya olan 200.00,00 TL borcunu \u00f6demedi\u011fi, 03.03.2009 tarihinde intifa hakk\u0131 tesis edilen ta\u015f\u0131nmazla ilgili ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n 15.04.2014 tarihinde a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, toplanan delillerle daval\u0131 \u2026\u2019\u0131n ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi davas\u0131 neticesinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 zorla\u015ft\u0131rmak veya sat\u0131\u015fta kendisine avantaj sa\u011flayarak davac\u0131n\u0131n ma\u011fduriyetine sebep olmak gibi bir amac\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 kan\u0131tlanamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. O halde,<em><strong> davan\u0131n t\u00fcmden reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7elerle k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi<\/strong><\/em> do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<br \/>\nYARGITAY<br \/>\nHUKUK GENEL KURULU<br \/>\nE. 2023\/11-214<br \/>\nK. 2023\/246<br \/>\nT. 22.3.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>TAPU \u0130PTAL\u0130 VE TESC\u0130L \u0130STEM\u0130\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><em>( Dava Konusu Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Dava D\u0131\u015f\u0131 Taraf\u0131n Davac\u0131 \u015eirketi Temsil ve \u0130lzama Yetkili M\u00fcd\u00fcr Oldu\u011fu D\u00f6nemde Davac\u0131 Ad\u0131na Daval\u0131ya Devredilmi\u015f Olmas\u0131 ve Bu S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin Davac\u0131 \u015eirketi Ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 Nitelikte Olmalar\u0131 Nazara Al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Davac\u0131 \u015eirketin Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc Ki\u015fi Konumunda Olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 &#8211; Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Sat\u0131\u015f Bedelinin Davac\u0131 \u015eirket Kasas\u0131na Konulmam\u0131\u015f Olmas\u0131 6762 SK Md.556 Kapsam\u0131nda \u015eirket M\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn Sorumlulu\u011fuyla \u0130lgili Olup An\u0131lan Sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131n Muvazaal\u0131 Olduklar\u0131 \u0130ddias\u0131n\u0131 \u0130spata Elveri\u015fli Olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YAZILI DEL\u0130LLE \u0130SPAT ZORUNLULU\u011eU<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0<em>( Dava Konusu Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Daval\u0131ya Devrine \u0130li\u015fkin Yap\u0131lan S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde Davac\u0131 \u015eirketin Taraf Konumunda Olmas\u0131 ve An\u0131lan S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin Resm\u00ee \u015eekilde Akdedilmi\u015f Olmalar\u0131 Sebebiyle Bu S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin Muvazaal\u0131 Olduklar\u0131na Dair \u0130ddian\u0131n Ancak Yaz\u0131l\u0131 Delille \u0130spatlanabilece\u011fi &#8211; Davac\u0131 \u015eirket Taraf\u0131ndan Bu Hususta Dosyaya Herhangi Bir Yaz\u0131l\u0131 Delil Sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131\/S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin Muvazaal\u0131 Olduklar\u0131na Dair \u0130ddian\u0131n \u0130spatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">\u015e\u0130RKET M\u00dcD\u00dcR\u00dcN\u00dcN SORUMLULU\u011eU<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong><em>( Dava Konusu Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n S\u00f6zle\u015fmede G\u00f6sterilen Devir Bedelleri ile Ke\u015fifle Belirlenen De\u011ferleri Aras\u0131ndaki Fark ve Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Sat\u0131\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini \u015eirket Ad\u0131na \u0130mzalayan \u015eirket M\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc ile Daval\u0131n\u0131n Akrabal\u0131k Ba\u011f\u0131 ve Ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n Devir Bedellerinin \u015eirket Kasas\u0131na Girmemi\u015f Olmas\u0131n\u0131n An\u0131lan S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin Muvazaal\u0131 Olduklar\u0131na Dair \u0130ddiay\u0131 \u0130spata Yeterli Olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/em> 6098\/m.19, 4721\/m.47,48,49,50 6100\/m.200,201,202,203,204<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u00d6ZET :<\/strong>\u00a0<\/span>Dava, muvazaa nedeniyle tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir. Dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n davac\u0131 \u015firketi temsil ve ilzama yetkili m\u00fcd\u00fcr oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde davac\u0131 ad\u0131na daval\u0131ya devredilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ve bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin davac\u0131 \u015firketi ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte olmalar\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, davac\u0131 \u015firketin dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi konumunda oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemez. Ayr\u0131ca dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin davac\u0131 \u015firket kasas\u0131na konulmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, 6762 SK Md.556 kapsam\u0131nda \u015firket m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn sorumlulu\u011fuyla ilgili olup bu husus an\u0131lan sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131n muvazaal\u0131 olduklar\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli de\u011fildir. Dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n daval\u0131ya devrine ili\u015fkin yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde davac\u0131 \u015firketin taraf konumunda olmas\u0131 ve an\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin resm\u00ee \u015fekilde akdedilmi\u015f olmalar\u0131 sebebiyle bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin muvazaal\u0131 olduklar\u0131na dair iddia ancak yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille ispatlanabilecek olup davac\u0131 \u015firket taraf\u0131ndan bu hususta dosyaya herhangi bir yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil sunulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmede g\u00f6sterilen devir bedelleri ile ke\u015fif ile belirlenen de\u011ferleri aras\u0131ndaki fark, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini \u015firket ad\u0131na imzalayan \u015firket m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc ile daval\u0131n\u0131n akrabal\u0131k ba\u011f\u0131 ve ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n devir bedellerinin \u015firket kasas\u0131na girmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 an\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin muvazaal\u0131 olduklar\u0131na dair iddiay\u0131 ispata yeterli de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Esas : 2021\/10362<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Karar : 2022\/2190<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Tarih : 17.03.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bursa B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin 22\/10\/2021 tarihli ve 2019\/1430 E.- 2021\/1536 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince dava ba\u011f\u0131\u015ftan r\u00fccu olarak nitelendirilmi\u015f ise de, daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;e yap\u0131lan kuru m\u00fclkiyetin devrinin tapuda sat\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde, daval\u0131 &#8230; &#8230; lehine irtifak tesisinin ise bedel g\u00f6sterilerek ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fini, <strong><em>tapuda<\/em> sat\u0131\u015f ve bedel g\u00f6sterilerek irtifak tesisi suretiyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen temliklerde davan\u0131n &#8220;ba\u011f\u0131\u015ftan r\u00fccu&#8221; olarak nitelendirilemeyece\u011fini,<\/strong> <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesini sakatlayan hata, hile, ikrah olmadan<\/span> resmi senedi imzalayarak dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kuru m\u00fclkiyetini daval\u0131 k\u0131z\u0131na sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik ettikten sonra ayn\u0131 akit ile ta\u015f\u0131nmazda daval\u0131 eski e\u015fine s\u00fcresiz intifa hakk\u0131 tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, resmi senette yer alan intifa hakk\u0131n\u0131n terkininin Yasan\u0131n 796. maddesinde yer alan ko\u015fullar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011funu<\/strong>, somut olayda ise an\u0131lan ko\u015fullar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusu yerinde olmamakla birlikte, karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde hata edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kamu d\u00fczeni bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kabul\u00fc ile Yerel Mahkemece verilen karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve daval\u0131 &#8230; bak\u0131m\u0131ndan davan\u0131n hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcreden reddine, di\u011fer daval\u0131 &#8230; bak\u0131m\u0131ndan davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine, toplanan delillere, h\u00fckm\u00fcn dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 (V\/3.2.) numaral\u0131 paragraftaki yasal ve hukuksal gerek\u00e7eye g\u00f6re B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince (IV\/3.) numaral\u0131 paragrafta yer verilen gerek\u00e7eyle yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesinde bir isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<blockquote>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>TANIK BEYANININ DE\u011eERLEND\u0130R\u0130LMES\u0130 :<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Tan\u0131klara \u0130tiraz; HMK Madde 255<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(1) Tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n davada yarar\u0131 bulunmak gibi tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011fu konusunda ku\u015fkuyu gerektiren sebepler varsa, bunu iki taraftan biri iddia ve ispat edebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ya\u015f, akrabal\u0131k ve davayla ilgili menfaatler tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131n de\u011ferini do\u011frudan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmez; ancak bu hususlar, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilirken g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulur. <em>Pekcanitez\/Atalay\/\u00d6zekes,Usul,12.s.507 2.HD.26.02.2003,1094\/2504-9.HD.21.09.2004,12150\/19501-HGK,27.04.2005,9\/261-284<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Aksine ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmalar\u0131d\u0131r<\/strong><\/span>. Akrabal\u0131k veya di\u011fer bir yak\u0131nl\u0131k ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir sebep say\u0131lamaz. Dosyada tan\u0131klar\u0131n olmam\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmu\u015f gibi ifade ettiklerini kabule yeterli delil ve olgu da yoktur. O halde kocan\u0131n g\u00fcven sars\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131na ili\u015fkin tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na ve olaylara \u00e7ok yak\u0131n tan\u0131k s\u00f6zlerine de\u011fer verilerek iste\u011fin kabul\u00fc gerekirken bu y\u00f6n g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmadan yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<em> 2.HD.03.06.2004,6300\/7255<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mahkemece daval\u0131-davac\u0131 kad\u0131n tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u2026\u2019nin beyanlar\u0131na, uzun y\u0131llar \u00f6nce ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen bir olay\u0131 hat\u0131rlayamayaca\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle itibar edilmeyerek ziynet alaca\u011f\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine dair h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f ise de, yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama ve toplanan delillerden bahsedilen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrecek maddi bir olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia ve ispat edilememi\u015f olup aslolan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n do\u011fruyu s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. (HMK m. 255). Dosyada, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n olmam\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmu\u015f gibi ifade etti\u011fini kabule yeterli delil ve olgu da yoktur.<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em> YARGITAY 2. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2016\/18487 Karar : 2018\/6856 Tarih : 29.05.2018<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;Bu olaylar\u0131 anlatan tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesi i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli bir hukuksal sebep bulunmamaktad\u0131r. TMK 166\/1. Maddesindeki bo\u015fanma ko\u015fullar\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finden, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile bo\u015fanmaya karar verilmesi gerekirken, yetersiz gerek\u00e7e ile reddi isabetsiz olmu\u015f, bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir&#8230;.&#8221;<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em> 2.HD.20.12.2012,11214\/31157<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n davada yarar\u0131 bulunmak gibi tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011fu konusunda ku\u015fkuyu gerektiren sebepler varsa, bunu iki taraftan biri iddia ve ispat edebilir.(m.255)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aksine ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmalar\u0131d\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>HGK.16.03.2005,2\/133-184.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davada menfaati bulunmak gibi \u015f\u00fcpheyi m\u00fccip k\u0131lan bir esbab\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia ve ispat edilmedik\u00e7e, tan\u0131klar\u0131n do\u011fruyu s\u00f6yledikleri as\u0131ld\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>HGK.,19.04.2006,11\/160-208.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mahkemece daval\u0131-davac\u0131 kad\u0131n tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u2026\u2019nin beyanlar\u0131na, uzun y\u0131llar \u00f6nce ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen bir olay\u0131 hat\u0131rlayamayaca\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle itibar edilmeyerek ziynet alaca\u011f\u0131 davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine dair h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f ise de, yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama ve toplanan delillerden bahsedilen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrecek maddi bir olay\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia ve ispat edilememi\u015f olup aslolan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n do\u011fruyu s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. (HMK m. 255). Dosyada, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n olmam\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmu\u015f gibi ifade etti\u011fini kabule yeterli delil ve olgu da yoktur. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>YARGITAY 2. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 Esas : 2016\/18487 Karar : 2018\/6856 Tarih : 29.05.2018<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tan\u0131k, bir vak\u0131a hakk\u0131nda sadece duyu organlar\u0131yla (g\u00f6zleri ile g\u00f6rmek ve kulaklar\u0131 ile i\u015fitmek suretiyle) edindi\u011fi bilgiyi aktar\u0131r; yoksa bir vak\u0131a hakk\u0131ndaki anlay\u0131\u015f ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerini, de\u011ferlendirmelerini bildiremez; bildirse dahi bunlar h\u00fckme dayanak yap\u0131lamaz. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">2<em>.HD.21.02.1997,787\/1914-2.HD.20.04.2001,4676\/6384-Bilge\/\u00d6nen,Yarg\u0131lama,s.523<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere daval\u0131dan borcuna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k al\u0131nan \u00e7ekler zaman\u0131nda ibraz edilmedi\u011finden kambiyo vasf\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015f ise de bunlara yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak dayan\u0131labilir. Taraflar aras\u0131nda temel ili\u015fki nedeniyle alacak her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispatlanabilir. Mahkemece, dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 bilgileri yoktur. Tamam\u0131 duyuma dayal\u0131 bilgilerdir ve davac\u0131n\u0131n alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kan\u0131tlamaya yeterli de\u011fildir. Bu durumda davan\u0131n reddi gerekir. Ne var ki, davac\u0131n\u0131n delil listesinde her t\u00fcrl\u00fc yasal kan\u0131t demek suretiyle yemin deliline de dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu durumda davac\u0131n\u0131n bu bedele ili\u015fkin daval\u0131ya yemin teklif hakk\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131larak sonuca uygun karar verilmesi gerekirken aksi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerle yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozma gerektirir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>YARGITAY 13. Hukuk Dairesi Esas No: 2012\/13178 Karar No: 2012\/17487<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; her ne kadar mahkemece, davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131ndan birinin (davac\u0131n\u0131n ailesinin d\u00fckkan\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7i) anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na itibar edilerek, ayr\u0131l\u0131k ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmeden \u00f6nce davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ortak ihtiya\u00e7lar i\u00e7in harcand\u0131\u011f\u0131, bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ise daval\u0131 eski e\u015fin babas\u0131na verildi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fc\u015fterek haneyi terk ederken d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde tak\u0131lan ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine var\u0131larak davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmi\u015f ise de, anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na itibar edilen bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 olmay\u0131p, duyuma dayal\u0131d\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda dinlenilen di\u011fer davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ise, davac\u0131 H\u2026\u2019\u0131n ailesinin yan\u0131na d\u00f6nerken evlili\u011fi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ailesi taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan e\u015fyalar\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, H\u2026\u2019a d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde 5-6 tane burma bilezik tak\u0131l\u0131p bunlar\u0131 davac\u0131 H\u2026\u2019\u0131n yan\u0131nda getirdi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu nedenle de, s\u0131rf duyuma dayal\u0131 tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na dayanarak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>YARGITAY 3. Hukuk Dairesi ESAS: 2013\/16952 KARAR: 2014\/1575<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDavac\u0131 erkek tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n baz\u0131lar\u0131 davac\u0131dan duyum, baz\u0131lar\u0131 ise g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 olmayan beyanlar olup bo\u015fanmaya esas al\u0131namaz.\u201d <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>(Yarg\u0131tay 2. H.D. 2016\/13531 E. , 2016\/12519 K. , T.28.06.2016 )<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Bu kapsamda hile iddias\u0131na dayal\u0131 davalarda dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 bilgiler olmay\u0131p, tan\u0131klar davac\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na at\u0131f yapmak suretiyle beyanda bulunmu\u015flarsa, hile iddias\u0131 ispatlanamam\u0131\u015f demektir\u00a0(YHGK. 23.06.1999 T. 13-533 E. 533 K).<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">D\u00fczenlenen belgeyi okumama durumunun hile olarak nitelendirilebilmesinin; daval\u0131n\u0131n veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin, bu okumamay\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bir davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n olayda ispatlanmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, <u>itimat \u00fczerine belgeyi okumadan imza eden taraf\u0131n, hile iddias\u0131na dayanamayaca\u011f\u0131,<\/u>\u00a0<u>saikte hatan\u0131n, hile say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/u><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>(Y.4.HD. 23.03.1968 T. 4668 E. 2754 K.)<\/em><\/span><\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas No : 2017\/2-2720<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar No : 2021\/364<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230; Bu haliyle davac\u0131 iddias\u0131 ile, davac\u0131 tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 birbiriyle \u00e7eli\u015fti\u011fi gibi, ayr\u0131ca bu beyan\u0131n soyut, iddia edilen olaylar\u0131n anlat\u0131m\u0131na uymayan ve bu nedenle inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131ktan uzak oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. H\u00fckme esas al\u0131namayaca\u011f\u0131 belirlenen bu eylem d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda daval\u0131 kad\u0131n e\u015ften kaynaklanan kusurlu bir davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ispatlanamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK uyar\u0131nca tan\u0131k delili takdiri delildir. Ayn\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un &#8221; Delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi&#8221; ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 198.maddesine g\u00f6re &#8216; kanuni istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hakimin delilleri serbest\u00e7e&#8217; de\u011ferlendirebilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Burada hakimin, tan\u0131k delili alt\u0131nda yer alan beyanlar\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken, sadece kendi vicdani kanaatinden bahsetmesi yeterli olmay\u0131p ayr\u0131ca dinlenen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin, hangi nedenlerle h\u00fckme esas al\u0131n\u0131p al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da belirtmesi gerekmektedir. Ba\u015fka bir olayda da Hukuk Genel Kurulu 20.02.2013 tarihli ve 2012\/9-843 E.2013\/253 K. Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda bu hususu &#8221; &#8230;. S\u0131kl\u0131kla ba\u015fvurulan delillerden biri olan tan\u0131k beyan\u0131, takdiri bir delildir, hakimi ba\u011flamaz ancak hakim, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken sadece vicdani kanaati ile karar veremez. Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ya da aksine h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmesi durumunda, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n neden kabul edildi\u011fi ya da edilmedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanmal\u0131d\u0131r.&#8221; \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221;<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\"><\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu (HMK) uyar\u0131nca tan\u0131k delili takdiri delildir. Ayn\u0131 kanunun &#8220;Delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi&#8221; ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 198. maddesine g\u00f6re &#8220;kanuni istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda h\u00e2kimin delilleri serbest\u00e7e&#8221; de\u011ferlendirebilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Burada h\u00e2kimin; tan\u0131k delili alt\u0131nda yer alan beyanlar\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken, sadece kendi vicdani kanaatinden bahsetmesi yeterli olmay\u0131p ayr\u0131ca dinlenen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin, hangi nedenlerle h\u00fckme esas al\u0131n\u0131p al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da belirtmesi gerekmektedir. Ba\u015fka bir olayda da <strong>Hukuk Genel Kurulu 20.02.2013 tarihli ve 2012\/9-843 E., 2013\/253 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda bu hususu &#8220;&#8230;.s\u0131kl\u0131kla ba\u015fvurulan delillerden biri olan tan\u0131k beyan\u0131, takdiri bir delildir, h\u00e2kimi ba\u011flamaz ancak h\u00e2kim, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken sadece vicdani kanaati ile karar veremez. Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ya da aksine h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmesi durumunda, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n neden kabul edildi\u011fi ya da edilmedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanmal\u0131d\u0131r,..<\/strong>.&#8221; \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2012\/8395<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2012\/12749<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 21.05.2012<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mahkemece, \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n davac\u0131 baba yan\u0131nda kal\u0131p kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tam ve sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 olarak ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmadan, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki giderilmeden, daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesinin gerek\u00e7esi a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan; yaln\u0131zca davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n ifadesine g\u00f6re eksik inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma ile h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, bu husus bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ONUNCU HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2010\/1382<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2010\/7717<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 31.05.2010<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Ayr\u0131ca mahkemece, gerek talimat yoluyla gerekse duru\u015fmada dinlenen tan\u0131klardan bir \u00e7o\u011funun, davac\u0131n\u0131n dava konusu d\u00f6nemde kaloriferci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmeleri kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesinin gerek\u00e7eleri yeterli g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. &#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ON\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2000\/7671<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2000\/8203<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 10.10.2000<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Davac\u0131, \u00f6d\u00fcn\u00e7 iddias\u0131na dayanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Havalelere ili\u015fkin \u00f6rnekleri dosyaya sunulan banka dekontlar\u0131nda, paralar\u0131n hangi ili\u015fkiden dolay\u0131 g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanmam\u0131\u015f, davac\u0131 bu y\u00f6nde ba\u015fkaca yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil de sunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ne var ki,taraflar\u0131n karde\u015f olduklar\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011fildir. Bu durumda davac\u0131, iddias\u0131n\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 293. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca tan\u0131kla ispat edebilir. Nitekim her iki taraf da tan\u0131k deliline dayanm\u0131\u015f ve dinletmi\u015f; davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131 tarih ve miktar da belirtmek suretiyle, davac\u0131n\u0131n sundu\u011fu banka dekontlar\u0131yla havale edilen paralar\u0131n, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131ya \u00f6d\u00fcn\u00e7 olarak g\u00f6nderildi\u011fini, istenilmesine ra\u011fmen daval\u0131n\u0131n bu borcunu \u00f6demedi\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ve ku\u015fkudan uzak bi\u00e7imde beyan etmi\u015flerdir. Daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n da, bu beyanlara itibar edilmemesini gerektirecek, aksi y\u00f6nde bir a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 yoktur.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ONBE\u015e\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2016\/763<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2016\/1177<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 23.02.2016<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Tan\u0131kl\u0131k takdiri bir delildir (HMK 198). Bu nedenle hakim, tan\u0131klar\u0131n ifadeleri ile ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir; tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n do\u011fru s\u00f6ylemedi\u011fini, ba\u015fka delil ve belirtilerle anlarsa, tan\u0131k ifadelerinin aksi y\u00f6nde de karar verebilir. Fakat, tan\u0131k ifadelerini serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken sadece hakimin vicdani kanaati yeterli olmay\u0131p, h\u00fck\u00fcmde bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin neden kabul edilmedi\u011finin belirtilmesi gerekir (Prof.Dr. Baki Kuru, Prof.Dr. Ramazan Arslan, Prof.Dr. Ejder Y\u0131lmaz, Medeni Usul Hukuku, 22. bask\u0131, sayfa 438). Taraflardan her biri de tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n davada hukuki yarar\u0131 bulundu\u011fu gibi, bir nedenle do\u011fru s\u00f6ylemedi\u011fini iddia ve ispat edebilir (HMK 255). As\u0131l olan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n do\u011fruyu s\u00f6ylemi\u015f oldu\u011fudur. Akrabal\u0131k, arkada\u015fl\u0131k, i\u015f\u00e7i i\u015fveren ili\u015fkisi ve benzeri bir yak\u0131nl\u0131k ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na itibar edilmemesini gerektirmez. Tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n aksinin kabul\u00fcn\u00fc gerektirir delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na itibar edilmesi gerekir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">ONALTINCI HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2015\/5160<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2016\/3544<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 31.03.2016<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Dinlenen yerel bilirki\u015fi beyanlar\u0131 ise soyut nitelikte olup, ayd\u0131nlat\u0131c\u0131 de\u011fildir. Mahkemece, tan\u0131k s\u00f6zleri aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki giderilmeden, daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131 &#8230; &#8230; ve &#8230; beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesinin gerek\u00e7esi a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan, tan\u0131k ve yerel bilirki\u015filerin soyut nitelikli beyanlar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak karar verilmesi isabetsizdir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">ONDOKUZUNCU HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2016\/1703<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2016\/15745<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 13.12.2016<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mahkemece dinlenilen daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131ndan &#8230; isimli tan\u0131k davac\u0131n\u0131n dava konusu bi\u00e7erd\u00f6veri kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etti\u011fi halde Mahkemece bu tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f ve bu hususun gerek\u00e7esi de karar yerinde belirtilmemi\u015ftir. \u00d6nceki davada davac\u0131n\u0131n bi\u00e7erd\u00f6vere bir tak\u0131m faydal\u0131 masraflar yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015f olup bu kabul kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en daval\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 aleyhindeki beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesinin g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc gerek\u00e7eleri a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan bu tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na itibar edilmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesinde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc g\u00f6sterir. \u00d6te yandan uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n bi\u00e7erd\u00f6verden yararlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden davac\u0131n\u0131n bi\u00e7erd\u00f6veri derhal daval\u0131ya iade edip takasa konu kendi bi\u00e7erd\u00f6verini de geri istememi\u015f olmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n da davan\u0131n sonucuna etkisi tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Y\u0130RM\u0130\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2016\/23527<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2019\/21032<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 13.11.2019<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;..dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 i\u015fveren aleyhine dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve davac\u0131 ile menfaat birlikteli\u011fi i\u00e7inde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, kural olarak beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesi gerekir. &#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y\u0130RM\u0130\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2016\/16039<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2019\/13538<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 20.06.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221; Davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 i\u015fveren aleyhine dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve davac\u0131 ile menfaat birlikteli\u011fi i\u00e7inde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakla kural olarak beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesi gerekir. Davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n, davac\u0131 ile ayn\u0131 mahiyette davalar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 sebebiyle salt husumetli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na itibarla davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla mesai yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve hafta tatili ile ulusal bayram genel tatil g\u00fcnlerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc isabetli olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y\u0130RM\u0130\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2018\/15730<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2018\/28057<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 24.12.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Davac\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7i taraf\u0131ndan tan\u0131k deliline dayan\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde; 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 255. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, aksine ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan\u0131n tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmalar\u0131 oldu\u011fu ilkesi g\u00f6zetilerek de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Akrabal\u0131k veya di\u011fer bir yak\u0131nl\u0131k ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir sebep say\u0131lamaz ise de i\u015fveren aleyhine dava a\u00e7an ki\u015filer davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 olarak dinlenmi\u015f ise bu i\u015f\u00e7ilerin tan\u0131kl\u0131klar\u0131na kural olarak itibar edilmemesi; birbirlerine tan\u0131kl\u0131k eden ki\u015filerin beyanlar\u0131na ihtiyatla yakla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 ile bu tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer yan delillerle birlikte de\u011ferlendirilerek, sonuca gidilmesi gerekir. Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 13.04.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/2-751 E. 2011\/96 K.; 12.09.2012 g\u00fcn ve 2012\/2 E. 2012\/551 K., 25.02.2015 g\u00fcn 2013\/9-1447 E., 2015\/854 K. ve 29.06.2016 g\u00fcn ve 2015\/22-1444 E. 2016\/869 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilamlar\u0131 da bu y\u00f6ndedir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y\u0130RM\u0130\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2018\/9805<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2018\/16501<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 02.07.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fyerinde fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve resmi tatillerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak talep konusu t\u00fcm d\u00f6nemi kapsamayan puantaj kay\u0131tlar\u0131 delil olarak sunulmu\u015ftur. Mahkemece, talep konusu resmi tatil \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 ve fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccret talepleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden, puantaj kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nem i\u00e7in davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anlat\u0131m\u0131 esas al\u0131narak sonuca gidilmi\u015f ise de; dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re daval\u0131 aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan davas\u0131 mevcut olup davac\u0131 ile menfaat birlikteli\u011fi i\u00e7inde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle kural olarak bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemesi gerekir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y A R G I T A Y<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Y\u0130RM\u0130\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ESAS : 2017\/11745<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>KARAR : 2018\/8871<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>TAR\u0130H : 14.07.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re, davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 i\u015fveren aleyhine ayn\u0131 taleplerle dava a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131, bu sebeple i\u015fverenle husumetli OLDUKLARI ANLA\u015eILMAKTADIR. Fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fman\u0131n ispat\u0131 konusunda salt husumetli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 itibar edilerek sonuca gidilemez. Bu itibarla, davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma iddias\u0131yla ilgili olarak daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilerek sonuca G\u0130D\u0130LMES\u0130 GEREK\u0130R.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>10. Hukuk Dairesi<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas No:2018\/7202<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar No:2020\/1223<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 ile bu dosyada bilgi ve g\u00f6rg\u00fcs\u00fcne ba\u015fvurulan tan\u0131klar\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131, varsa \u00e7eli\u015fki giderilmeli, yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde dinlenen tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesinde, i\u015f yerinin kapsam\u0131, kapasitesi ve niteli\u011fi nazara al\u0131nmal\u0131, i\u015fin mevsimlik oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131rsa d\u00f6nemleri belirlenmeli, bu d\u00f6nemde davac\u0131 ile i\u015fveren aras\u0131ndaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ask\u0131da oldu\u011fu ve mevsimlik d\u00f6nemlerde hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin i\u015flemeyece\u011fi g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulmal\u0131; b\u00f6ylelikle; \u00e7al\u0131\u015fman\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 ve biti\u015f tarihleri, mevsimlik mi, s\u00fcrekli mi oldu\u011fu, yap\u0131lan i\u015fin kapsam ve niteli\u011fi de nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda k\u0131smi \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fundan k\u0131smi ve kesintili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6ntemince ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">T.C.<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Yarg\u0131tay<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">16. Hukuk Dairesi<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas No:2020\/751<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar No:2020\/1134<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Tan\u0131k ve yerel bilirki\u015filerden, ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n \u00f6nceki durumlar\u0131, kime ait olduklar\u0131, kimden kime nas\u0131l intikal ettikleri, kim taraf\u0131ndan ne zamandan beri ve ne suretle kullan\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 ve \u00fczerlerindeki imar-ihya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n hangi tarihte tamamland\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131nda maddi olaylara dayal\u0131 ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bilgi al\u0131nmal\u0131, tan\u0131k ve yerel bilirki\u015fi beyanlar\u0131 bilimsel esaslara ve maddi bulgulara dayan\u0131larak haz\u0131rlanan bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131yla denetlenmeli, beyanlar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fkiler gerekti\u011finde y\u00fczle\u015ftirme yap\u0131lmak suretiyle y\u00f6ntemince giderilmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131&#8230;&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>22. Hukuk Dairesi<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas No:2019\/6998<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar No:2019\/18654<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mahkemece verilen karara kar\u015f\u0131, dairemizce; dosya kapsam\u0131nda dinlenen taraf tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eli\u015fkili olup, mahkemece beyanlar aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki giderilmeden davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, hafta tatili ile ulusal bayram ve genel tatil \u00fccreti talepleri hakk\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu,&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>9. Hukuk Dairesi<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas No:2019\/6786<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar No:2019\/17880<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Tan\u0131klar\u0131n birbirleri ile ya da \u00f6nceki ifadeleri ile \u00e7eli\u015fki olmas\u0131 halinde bu \u00e7eli\u015fki Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan tan\u0131klardan sorularak giderilmelidir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2015\/7636<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2018\/1021<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 19.02.2018<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Aksine ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmalar\u0131d\u0131r. (6100 s. HMK md. 255) Akrabal\u0131k veya di\u011fer bir yak\u0131nl\u0131k ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir sebep say\u0131lamaz. Dosyada, davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 &#8230; yalan beyanda bulundu\u011funu, kabule yeterli delil ve olgu da yoktur. Bu durumda, olaylar\u0131 \u00e7ok yak\u0131ndan bilen davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zlerine de\u011fer verilmesi gerekirken, s\u0131rf akrabal\u0131k nedeniyle beyan\u0131na itibar edilmemesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2021\/21<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/855<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 17.02.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mahkemece, davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n birinci dereceden akraba olmalar\u0131 nedeniyle beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmemi\u015fse de, aksine ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil ve olaylar bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a as\u0131l olan tan\u0131klar\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemi\u015f olmalar\u0131d\u0131r. (HMK 255.madde) Akrabal\u0131k veya di\u011fer bir yak\u0131nl\u0131k ba\u015fl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131na tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc bir sebep say\u0131lmaz. Dosyada davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n olmam\u0131\u015f\u0131 olmu\u015f gibi ifade ettiklerini kabule yeterli delil ve olguda yoktur. O halde olaylara \u00e7ok yak\u0131n davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmelidir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><center><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/center><center><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/center><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2021\/7628<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 2023\/855<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<td><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>: 15.02.2023<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">6098 s. TBK&#8217;n\u0131n 39. maddesinde &#8220;Yan\u0131lma veya aldatma sebebiyle ya da korkutulma sonucunda s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan taraf, yan\u0131lma veya aldatmay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi ya da korkutman\u0131n etkisinin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan ba\u015flayarak bir y\u0131l i\u00e7inde s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmez veya verdi\u011fi \u015feyi geri istemezse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi onam\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.&#8221; d\u00fczenlemeleri yer almaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bildiriminin, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 39. maddesinde belirtilen bir y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ula\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. <strong>Bildirimde, ge\u00e7ersizlik sebebi tam olarak a\u00e7\u0131klanmasa dahi, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeden d\u00f6n\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 kal\u0131nmayaca\u011f\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshedildi\u011fi, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin iptal edildi\u011fi gibi a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 mutlaka i\u00e7ermelidir.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmama bildirimi (iptal beyan\u0131) hi\u00e7bir \u015fekle tabi de\u011fildir. \u015eekle ba\u011fl\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede de, \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc irade beyan\u0131yla iptal bildirimi yap\u0131labilir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmama bildiriminde (iptal &#8230;) bir y\u0131ll\u0131k k\u0131sa s\u00fcre, iradeyi sakatlayan sebeplerin \u00f6\u011frenilmesi veya korkunun etkisinin ortadan kalkmas\u0131yla ba\u015flar. Bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcrenin, daha uzun bir s\u00fcre ile de s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131l\u0131p s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 doktrinde tart\u0131\u015fmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<div dir=\"auto\" style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<p>\u0130radesi bozulan kimse, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi yapt\u0131ktan 5, 10 veya 30 y\u0131l sonra yan\u0131lma veya aldatmay\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015fse, \u00f6\u011frenme tarihinden itibaren 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi iptal edip edemeyece\u011fi konusunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f birli\u011fi bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re, s\u00f6zle\u015fme tarihinden itibaren 10 y\u0131l ge\u00e7mesi halinde, iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n son bulaca\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmekte, di\u011fer g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re ise, T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 39. maddesinde kanun koyucunun daha uzun bir s\u00fcreyi bilerek koymad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kanunun a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda yorum yoluyla yeni kural konulamayaca\u011f\u0131, b\u00f6yle bir s\u00fcre konulmas\u0131n\u0131n kanun koyucunun amac\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 ve an\u0131lan maddenin a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmektedir. <em>(Eraslan &#8230;, Yan\u0131lma, Aldatma, Korkutma Davalar\u0131, sayfa, 437-438)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan herhangi bir \u015fekle ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015f olan bu beyan, kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren s\u00f6zle\u015fme ili\u015fkisini (hangi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f benimsenmi\u015f olursa olsun) kesin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz hale sokar, iptal beyan\u0131 geri al\u0131nmaz.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bildirimi, s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi kesin olarak ge\u00e7ersiz hale getiren bozucu yenilik do\u011furucu &#8220;in\u015fai&#8221; bir hakt\u0131r. ( &#8230;, Yan\u0131lma, Aldatma, Korkutma Davalar\u0131, sayfa, 436-437). Bu niteli\u011fi itibariyle de, \u015farta ba\u011fl\u0131 tutulamaz ve bu bildirimden d\u00f6n\u00fclemez. \u0130rade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n hakimiyet alan\u0131na ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 anda istenen sonucu kendili\u011finden do\u011furmaya yeterlidir. Ayr\u0131ca bir iptal davas\u0131 a\u00e7maya, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla iptali dava yoluyla ileri s\u00fcrmeye gerek yoktur.&#8221; <em>(Prof. Dr. Fikret &#8230; Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler 18.Bask\u0131. 412 vd. Sayfalar).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div dir=\"auto\">\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dairenin yerle\u015fik uygulamas\u0131na g\u00f6re, yan\u0131lma (hata), aldatma (hile), korkutma (ikrah) her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispat edilebilece\u011fi gibi iptal hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hi\u00e7 bir \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bildirimi (iptal &#8230;), irade bozuklu\u011funun \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa y\u00f6neltilecek bir irade a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, defi yahut dava yoluyla kullan\u0131labilir. <em>(1.Hukuk Dairesinin 2014\/11612 Esas, 2014\/ 14462 Karar, 18.09.2014 tarihli-, 2013\/21405 Esas, 2014\/50 Karar, 13.01.2014 tarihli, 2016\/11701 Esas, 22.12.2016 tarihli, 2003\/52 Esas, 2003\/762 Karar, 22.01.2003 tarihli v.d.)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>E. 2019\/2-32<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>K. 2019\/993<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T. 3.10.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;\u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda; dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zellikle vurgulanan daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fine y\u00f6nelik \u2018&#8217; eski e\u015fine geri d\u00f6n de seni tekrar boynuzlas\u0131n&#8221; beyan\u0131na vurgu yap\u0131lmak suretiyle, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fine hakaret etti\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131klarca da ifade edildi\u011fi \u00fczere daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fine ayn\u0131 zamanda \u2018&#8217; b\u0131kt\u0131m senden, senin pisliklerini temizlemekten \u2018&#8217; ve tan\u0131klara da \u2018&#8217; bu adamla u\u011fra\u015f\u0131yorum, alt\u0131na ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131yor \u2018&#8217; dedi\u011fi de sabittir. Bu sebeplerle daval\u0131 kad\u0131n taraf\u0131ndan \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere davac\u0131 erke\u011fe hakaret edildi\u011fi sabit olmakla beraber bu vak\u0131aya y\u00f6nelik olarak esas al\u0131nan tan\u0131k ifadelerinin ger\u00e7e\u011fe ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu konusunda da ciddi ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil, olay bulunmamaktad\u0131r. A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, Hukuk Genel Kurulunca da benimsenen \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na uyulmak gerekirken, \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilirken tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n olaya ili\u015fkin (ki\u015fisel) bilgisinin yan\u0131nda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ki\u015fisel \u00f6zellikleri de nazara al\u0131n\u0131r. Nitekim HMK m. 254 uyar\u0131nca, dinlenme s\u0131ras\u0131nda \u00f6nce tan\u0131ktan ad\u0131, soyad\u0131, do\u011fum tarihi, mesle\u011fi, adresi, taraflarla akrabal\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n veya ba\u015fka bir yak\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00fcveni etkileyecek bir durumunun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorulur. Taraflarla ili\u015fkisi olan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131na bu nispette de\u011fer verilmelidir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc taraflarla hi\u00e7bir ili\u015fkisi olmayan ve davan\u0131n kazan\u0131lmas\u0131nda menfaati bulunmayan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 ile dava sonucunda verilecek h\u00fck\u00fcmden menfaati etkilenecek olan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin ayn\u0131 oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemez. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>Bilge\/ \u00d6nen, s.523; Meri\u00e7, s.113; Ertanhan, s.290; Atalay, Pekcan\u0131tez Usul, s.1910.-Belgesay, Re\u015fit Mustafa, Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu \u015eerhi, \u0130kinci Tab\u0131, C.II, \u0130stanbul 1939, s.100; Ertanhan, s.308.<\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">H\u00e2kim tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131 dikkatlice de\u011ferlendirmeli; varsa \u00e7eli\u015fkileri gidermeli ve bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131na di\u011ferine g\u00f6re \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131yorsa ya da tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 karar\u0131na hi\u00e7 temel alm\u0131yorsa buna ili\u015fkin gerek\u00e7elere karar\u0131nda mutlaka yer vermelidir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>(Ansay, s.267). 33 Postac\u0131o\u011flu\/ Altay, s.734; Atalay, Pekcan\u0131tez Usul, s.1910; Bilge\/ \u00d6nen, s. 523, dn. 3; G\u00f6rg\u00fcn, s.366.<\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Sadece vicdani kanaatle karar verilmesi veya tan\u0131k s\u00f6zlerine inan\u0131lmamas\u0131 yeterli de\u011fildir; her tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131na neden itibar edilip edilmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7eli bir \u015fekilde ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>Ertanhan, s.392-393; Y\u0131ld\u0131r\u0131m, s.81-82; Postac\u0131o\u011flu\/ Altay, s.734; Meri\u00e7, s.102-103.<\/em><\/span> Ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesini tam ve do\u011fru olarak aktarmas\u0131, olaya ili\u015fkin bilgilerine kendinden bir \u015fey eklememesi ve sorulan sorular\u0131 cevapland\u0131rabilmesi \u015fartt\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>Ansay s.267; Meri\u00e7 s.94.<\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcnd\u00fcr bu nedenle tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m beyanlar\u0131na itibar edip bir k\u0131s\u0131m beyanlar\u0131na \u00e7eli\u015fki, g\u00fcvenilirlik vs. nedenlerle itibar etmemek mant\u0131\u011fa ters olup,<\/strong> b\u00f6yle bir gerek\u00e7e ile tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 takdir edilemez.<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Taraflar\u0131n veya vekillerinin mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde ikrar ettikleri vak\u0131alar, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kar ve ispat\u0131 gerekmez (Kesin Delil). Maddi bir hatadan kaynaklanmad\u0131k\u00e7a ikrardan d\u00f6n\u00fclemez. Sulh g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeleri s\u0131ras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan ikrar taraflar\u0131 ba\u011flamaz<\/strong>. (HMK Md. 188)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>G\u00d6RG\u00dcYE DAYALI OLMAYAN DUYUMA ve VARSAYIMA DAYALI TANIK BEYANININ DE\u011eER\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ba\u015fkalar\u0131ndan duydu\u011fu veya ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fu \u015feylerle ilgili mahkemeye bunlar\u0131 nakleden ki\u015fi, bu anlamda tan\u0131k olmay\u0131p, bu ki\u015filerin bilgi vermesine &#8221;ba\u015fkas\u0131ndan duyma tan\u0131kl\u0131k&#8221; (simaa m\u00fcstenit \u015fahitlik veya tan\u0131kl\u0131k, hearsay evidence) denir. <em>Bkz.Kuru,Usul C.3 s.2567 vd;Kuru\/Arslan\/Y\u0131lmaz, Usul,22 , B.s.431 vd;Pekcanitez\/Atalay\/\u00d6zekes,Usul,12.B,s.506, Ertanhan,Tan\u0131kl\u0131k,s.48, 6.HD.24.10.2011,6792\/11461-13.HD.08.10.2012,15558\/22161<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tan\u0131k, bir vak\u0131a hakk\u0131nda sadece duyu organlar\u0131yla (g\u00f6zleri ile g\u00f6rmek ve kulaklar\u0131 ile i\u015fitmek suretiyle) edindi\u011fi bilgiyi aktar\u0131r; yoksa bir vak\u0131a hakk\u0131ndaki anlay\u0131\u015f ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerini, de\u011ferlendirmelerini bildiremez; bildirse dahi bunlar h\u00fckme dayanak yap\u0131lamaz.<em>2.HD.21.02.1997,787\/1914-2.HD.20.04.2001,4676\/6384-Bilge\/\u00d6nen,Yarg\u0131lama,s.523<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere daval\u0131dan borcuna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k al\u0131nan \u00e7ekler zaman\u0131nda ibraz edilmedi\u011finden kambiyo vasf\u0131n\u0131 yitirmi\u015f ise de bunlara yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak dayan\u0131labilir. Taraflar aras\u0131nda temel ili\u015fki nedeniyle alacak her t\u00fcrl\u00fc delille ispatlanabilir. Mahkemece, dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 bilgileri yoktur. Tamam\u0131 duyuma dayal\u0131 bilgilerdir ve davac\u0131n\u0131n alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kan\u0131tlamaya yeterli de\u011fildir. Bu durumda davan\u0131n reddi gerekir. Ne var ki, davac\u0131n\u0131n delil listesinde her t\u00fcrl\u00fc yasal kan\u0131t demek suretiyle yemin deliline de dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu durumda davac\u0131n\u0131n bu bedele ili\u015fkin daval\u0131ya yemin teklif hakk\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131larak sonuca uygun karar verilmesi gerekirken aksi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerle yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozma gerektirir. <em>YARGITAY 13. Hukuk Dairesi Esas No: 2012\/13178 Karar No: 2012\/17487<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; her ne kadar mahkemece, davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131ndan birinin (davac\u0131n\u0131n ailesinin d\u00fckkan\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7i) anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na itibar edilerek, ayr\u0131l\u0131k ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmeden \u00f6nce davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ortak ihtiya\u00e7lar i\u00e7in harcand\u0131\u011f\u0131, bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ise daval\u0131 eski e\u015fin babas\u0131na verildi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fc\u015fterek haneyi terk ederken d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde tak\u0131lan ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine var\u0131larak davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmi\u015f ise de, anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na itibar edilen bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 olmay\u0131p, duyuma dayal\u0131d\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda dinlenilen di\u011fer davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ise, davac\u0131 H\u2026\u2019\u0131n ailesinin yan\u0131na d\u00f6nerken evlili\u011fi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ailesi taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan e\u015fyalar\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, H\u2026\u2019a d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde 5-6 tane burma bilezik tak\u0131l\u0131p bunlar\u0131 davac\u0131 H\u2026\u2019\u0131n yan\u0131nda getirdi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu nedenle de, s\u0131rf duyuma dayal\u0131 tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na dayanarak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(YARGITAY 3. Hukuk Dairesi ESAS: 2013\/16952 KARAR: 2014\/1575)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDavac\u0131 erkek tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>baz\u0131lar\u0131 davac\u0131dan duyum, baz\u0131lar\u0131 ise g\u00f6rg\u00fcye dayal\u0131 olmayan beyanlar olup bo\u015fanmaya esas al\u0131namaz<\/strong><\/span>.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 2. H.D. 2016\/13531 E. , 2016\/12519 K. , T.28.06.2016 )<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>TANI\u011eIN BEYANINDA NEY\u0130 KASTETT\u0130\u011e\u0130 YORUM KURALLARINA G\u00d6RE, T\u00dcM BEYAN B\u00dcT\u00dcNL\u00dc\u011e\u00dc ESAS ALINARAK BEL\u0130RLENMEL\u0130D\u0130R.<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin yorumunu d\u00fczenleyen TBK md.19 h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re , &#8221; Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin t\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn ve i\u00e7eri\u011finin belirlenmesinde ve yorumlanmas\u0131nda, taraflar\u0131n yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131kla veya ger\u00e7ek ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gizlemek i\u00e7in kulland\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00f6zc\u00fcklere bak\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n, ger\u00e7ek ve ortak iradeleri esas al\u0131n\u0131r &#8221; &#8230;.&#8221; 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK n\u0131n 19 ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 33.maddeleri uyar\u0131nca yarg\u0131\u00e7 taraflar\u0131n hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131\u00e7 aradaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmesel ili\u015fkiyi yorumlar, s\u00f6zle\u015fme t\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc ve i\u00e7eri\u011fini kendisi belirler. Taraflar\u0131n ger\u00e7ek ve ortak iradelerini esas al\u0131r. Bu sebeple taraflar aras\u0131ndaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u015f, vekalet, eser veya ortakl\u0131k s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi oldu\u011funun nitelendirilmesi yarg\u0131ca aittir.&#8221; <em>(Prof.Fikret Eren Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku \u015eerhi 1.Cilt s.604, O\u011fuzman\/\u00d6z, C.1,sh.197-198, Tekinay\/Akman\/Burcuo\u011flu\/Altop sh.148, Kaplan sh.15, K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7o\u011flu Bor\u00e7lar ,sh.154 vd.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taraflar kullan\u0131lan s\u00f6zc\u00fcklere g\u00fcnl\u00fck dilde veya i\u015f \u00e7evrelerinde kullan\u0131lan genel anlam\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 bir anlam da verebilirler. Taraflar\u0131n kulland\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00f6zc\u00fckler beyan metinin bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olarak g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmal\u0131, bireysel de\u011fil, beyan b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc i\u00e7inde sistematik olarak de\u011ferlendirilmeli, metnin di\u011fer par\u00e7a ve unsurlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutularak tek ba\u015f\u0131na yorumlanmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu ilkeye yorumda sistematik ba\u011flant\u0131 ilkesi denilmektedir. <em>(Prof.Fikret Eren Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku \u015eerhi 1.Cilt s.610, O\u011fuzman\/\u00d6z C.1 sh.199, Y.4.HD.26.10.1978 13113\/12134 E.K.)<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki,<\/strong> beyanlar\u0131n bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak, sa\u011flam ve g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini zedeleyen ve beyanlar\u0131 de\u011ferden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcren bir sebeptir. Bu nedenle bir taraftan tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda \u00e7eli\u015fki bulundu\u011fu belirtilerek beyanlara itibar edilmedi\u011finin dile getirilmesi, di\u011fer yandan \u00e7eli\u015fki bulundu\u011fu belirtilen tan\u0131klar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilerek h\u00fck\u00fcm sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131; a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a gerek\u00e7ede tezatl\u0131k ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturur. Bu durum ayn\u0131 zamanda mant\u0131k kurallar\u0131na da ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturur. Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD.2022\/3164 E.2022\/4995 K.,2022\/6640 E.2022\/6591 K.,2022\/6386 E.2022\/6570 K., HGK 2021\/601 E.2021\/1398 K.,HGK 2021\/125 E.2021\/447 K. Say\u0131l\u0131 ilamlar\u0131 ve bir \u00e7ok ilamda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda \u00e7eli\u015fki olu\u015ftu\u011funda bu \u00e7eli\u015fkiler gerekti\u011finde y\u00fczle\u015ftirme yap\u0131larak y\u00f6ntemince giderilmelidir. Tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcnd\u00fcr, de\u011ferlendirme sonucunda tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na itibar edilmeli veya edilmemelidir, itibar edilmeme gerek\u00e7esi belirtilmelidir. <em>(Tan\u0131k beyan\u0131, takdiri bir delildir; h\u00e2kimi ba\u011flamaz ancak h\u00e2kim, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 serbest\u00e7e takdir ederken sadece vicdani kanaati ile karar veremez. Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ya da aksine h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmesi durumunda, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n neden kabul edildi\u011fi ya da edilmedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Belirtilmelidir ki, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda veya tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 ile di\u011fer deliller aras\u0131nda \u00e7eli\u015fki bulundu\u011fu takdirde, sadece tan\u0131k s\u00f6zlerine dayan\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Nitekim Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 05.06.2015 tarihli ve 2013\/22-2392 E.-2015\/1518 K.; 09.12.2015 tarihli ve 2015\/22-1474 E.-2015\/2854 K. ve 29.06.2016 tarihli ve 2015\/22-1444 E.-2016\/869 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 ilkeler benimsenmi\u015ftir.)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>T.C.<br \/>\nYARGITAY<br \/>\n1. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<br \/>\nE. 2023\/2681<br \/>\nK. 2024\/4261<br \/>\nT. 6.6.2024<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere TBK&#8217;n\u0131n sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vekil edene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve 506. maddesinde aynen; &#8220;Vekil, vekalet borcunu bizzat ifa etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ancak vekile yetki verildi\u011fi veya durumun zorunlu ya da team\u00fcl\u00fcn m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde vekil, i\u015fi ba\u015fkas\u0131na yapt\u0131rabilir. Vekil \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vekalet verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zeterek, sadakat ve \u00f6zenle y\u00fcr\u00fctmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Vekaletin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse, g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vekaletin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur. Hatta malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. Vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekil de\u011finilen maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olur. Bu sorumluluk TBK&#8217;da benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcslenen basiretli bir vekilin sorumlulu\u011fu esas al\u0131narak daha da a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar. Vekil vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vekalet eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz. Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olup vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir. S\u00f6z konusu yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan hakim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fc niyeti te\u015fvik etmek en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Di\u011fer taraftan, TMK&#8217;n\u0131n \u201c\u0130yiniyetli \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1023. maddesi; \u201cTapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki tescile iyiniyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur.\u201d \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan bu maddeye g\u00f6re, tapu sicilinde ismi ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin ger\u00e7ek hak sahibi oldu\u011funa inanan veya kendisinden beklenen t\u00fcm \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen ger\u00e7ek malik olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tapu sicilinde yolsuzluk bulundu\u011funu bilmesi imk\u00e2ns\u0131z olan ki\u015finin iktisab\u0131 korunur. Ayn\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un \u201c\u0130yiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1024. maddesi ise; \u201cBir ayn\u00ee hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f ise, bunu bilen veya bilmesi gereken \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi bu tescile dayanamaz. Ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olmayan bir hukuk\u00ee i\u015fleme dayanan veya hukuk\u00ee sebepten yoksun bulunan tescil yolsuzdur. B\u00f6yle bir tescil y\u00fcz\u00fcnden ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131 zedelenen kimse, tescilin yolsuz oldu\u011funu iyiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131 do\u011frudan do\u011fruya ileri s\u00fcrebilir.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermektedir. Bu madde ile de iyi niyetli olmayan kimsenin iktisab\u0131n\u0131n korunmayaca\u011f\u0131na vurgu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 1023. maddesi iyiniyetle m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayni hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korurken; ayn\u0131 ilke tamamlay\u0131c\u0131 madde niteli\u011finde bulunan 1024. madde ile iyiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131slar\u0131n kazan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz saym\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ON\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/1014<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2020\/4488<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 10.06.2020<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u25a0 MENF\u0130 TESP\u0130T DAVASI<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>\u25a0 ALACAK BOR\u00c7 \u0130L\u0130\u015eK\u0130S\u0130<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>\u25a0 MA\u0130L YAZI\u015eMALARI BELGE N\u0130TEL\u0130\u011e\u0130NDED\u0130R<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>( 6100 s. Hukuk Muhakemeleri K 199 )<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;HMK&#8217;nun 199. maddesinde \u201d<strong>Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu vak\u0131alar\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli yaz\u0131l\u0131 veya bas\u0131l\u0131 metin, senet, \u00e7izim, plan, kroki, foto\u011fraf, film, g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc veya ses kayd\u0131 gibi veriler ile elektronik ortamdaki veriler ve bunlara benzer bilgi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 bu Kanuna g\u00f6re belgedir.\u201d<\/strong> yaz\u0131l\u0131d\u0131r. Bu d\u00fczenleme ile mail yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 da belge olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir. O halde, mahkemece <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">mail yaz\u0131\u015fmalar<\/span><\/strong>\u0131 ve davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan \u00f6demeler de\u011ferlendirilerek davac\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7lu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik inceleme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup, bozma nedenidir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcNC\u00dc HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2021\/8671<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2022\/654<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 07.02.2022<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu (TMK)\u2019nun \u201c\u0130spat Y\u00fck\u00fc\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 &#8230;&#8230;.maddesinde; \u201cKanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.\u201d ifadesine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Kanuni bir karineye dayanan taraf, sadece karinenin temelini olu\u015fturan vak\u0131aya ili\u015fkin ispat y\u00fck\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf, kanuni karinenin aksini ispat edebilir. 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK.n\u0131n 189\/3 maddesi (1086 say\u0131l\u0131 HUMK. mad. 287) &#8220;Kanunun belirli delillerle ispat\u0131n\u0131 emretti\u011fi hususla, ba\u015fka delillerle ispat olunamaz.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc amirdir. Ayn\u0131 Kanunun m. 200\/1 maddesine g\u00f6re (1086 say\u0131l\u0131 HUMK mad. 288) senetle ispat kural\u0131na g\u00f6re bir hakk\u0131n do\u011fumu, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmesi, devri, de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi, yenilenmesi, ertelenmesi, ikrar ve itfas\u0131 amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lan hukuki i\u015flemlerin yap\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 zamanki miktar veya de\u011feri kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 ge\u00e7ti\u011fi takdirde senetle \u0130spatlanmas\u0131 gerekir. 200\/11 (1086 say\u0131l\u0131 HUMK mad. 289) maddesinde de \u201csenetle ispat gereken hallerde kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k muvafakati ile tan\u0131k dinlenebilece\u011fi\u201d hususlar\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmektedir. 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;nun 199.maddesinde belge kavram\u0131 <strong>&#8220;Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu vak\u0131alar\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli yaz\u0131l\u0131 veya bas\u0131l\u0131 metin, senet, \u00e7izim, plan, kroki, foto\u011fraf, film, g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc veya ses kayd\u0131 gibi veriler ile elektronik ortamdaki veriler ve bunlara benzer bilgi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 bu Kanuna g\u00f6re belgedir.&#8221;<\/strong> \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Yine, ayn\u0131 kanunun 202. maddesinde ise delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 kavram\u0131 &#8221; (1) Senetle ispat zorunlulu\u011fu bulunan h\u00e2llerde delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 bulunursa tan\u0131k dinlenebilir. (2) Delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131, iddia konusu hukuki i\u015flemin tamamen ispat\u0131na yeterli olmamakla birlikte, s\u00f6z konusu hukuki i\u015flemi muhtemel g\u00f6steren ve kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen kimse veya temsilcisi taraf\u0131ndan verilmi\u015f veya g\u00f6nderilmi\u015f belgedir.&#8221; \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. A\u00e7\u0131klanan yasal d\u00fczenlemeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda dava dosyas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde; <strong>daval\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 \u015firketin m\u00fc\u015fteri temsilcisi ile yap\u0131lan telefon konu\u015fmas\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu bor\u00e7 bedellerinin \u00f6dendi\u011finin beyan edildi\u011fi, s\u00f6z konusu <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">ses kayd\u0131n\u0131n<\/span> davac\u0131n\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda elde edilen ses kayd\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabittir.<\/strong> Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan kanun yarar\u0131na bozma yoluna ba\u015fvurulabilecek nitelikte olan ve a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckteki yasalara ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunan bir karar verilmemi\u015ftir. Yasalara mutlak \u015fekilde muhalefet edilmedik\u00e7e kanun yarar\u0131na bozma karar\u0131 verilemez. O halde mahkemece, daval\u0131n\u0131n dava konusu bedelleri \u00f6dedi\u011fi kabul edilerek verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm usul ve yasaya uygun oldu\u011fundan Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019n\u0131n bu y\u00f6ne ili\u015fen kanun yarar\u0131na bozma talebinin reddi gerekir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c&#8230;\u00d6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetmek s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi basit\u00e7e taraflar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 hak ve bor\u00e7lar y\u00fckleyen, baz\u0131 y\u00f6nleri itibariyle talih ve tesad\u00fcfe, ayr\u0131ca \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanabilir&#8230;\u201d (<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi E. 2000\/8865 K. 2000\/9517 T. 6.7.2000)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c&#8230;Kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 511. ve devam\u0131 maddelerinden alan \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri, an\u0131lan kanunun 512. ve T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 545. maddesi gere\u011fince resmi \u015fekilde d\u00fczenlenmelidir. <strong>Resmi \u015fekilde d\u00fczenlenmeyen \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine de\u011fer verilerek tapu iptali ve tescil h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 6.2.2008 tarihli ve 2008\/14-70 2008\/104 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)&#8230;\u201d Yarg\u0131tay 14. Hukuk Dairesi E. 2011\/3435 K. 2011\/4733 T. 11.04.2011)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c&#8230;Dava, \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir&#8230; Kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 BK\u2019n\u0131n 511. vd. maddelerinden alan \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri, an\u0131lan kanunun 512. ve T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 545. maddesi gere\u011fince resmi \u015fekilde d\u00fczenlenmelidir. <strong>Resmi \u015fekilde d\u00fczenlenmeyen \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine de\u011fer verilerek tapu iptali ve tescil h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir&#8230;<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131lan davada bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131\u00a0miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n, bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusunun edimini yerine getirmedi\u011fi savunmas\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bak\u0131m borcu yerine getirilmedi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla feshini isteme hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda kullanmas\u0131 gereken bir hak oldu\u011fundan dinlenmez. Bu ilkeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; davac\u0131 resmi \u015fekilde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia ve ispat edemedi\u011finden tescil isteminin reddine karar verilerek&#8230;\u201d (<span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu E. 2012\/14-766 K. 2013\/297 T. 27.2.2013)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;\u2026Dava, \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkindir. Somut olayda&#8230; davac\u0131n\u0131n, dava dilek\u00e7esinde daval\u0131n\u0131n kendisine bakmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmedi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz bak\u0131ma muhta\u00e7 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, <strong>daval\u0131n\u0131n gelecekte kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 bak\u0131m sorumlulu\u011funu yerine getirmeyece\u011fine inand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek eldeki davay\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131;<\/strong> dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve dinlenen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndan da daval\u0131n\u0131n, davac\u0131ya kar\u015f\u0131 bak\u0131m borcunu yerine getirdi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 yan\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 temlik ettikten sonra, <strong>kendisine ilerde bak\u0131lmayaca\u011f\u0131 endi\u015fesiyle dava a\u00e7mas\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilemeyece\u011fi,<\/strong> kald\u0131 ki, bak\u0131m borcu yerine getirilmedi\u011finde dava a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n her zaman olanakl\u0131 bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde davan\u0131n reddinin isabetli oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221; <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">(<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Yarg\u0131t<\/span>ay Hukuk Genel Kurulu E. 2013\/1-2400 K. 2014\/68 T. 5.2.2014)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c&#8230;murisin ger\u00e7ek irade ve amac\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akitleriyle temlik etti\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n t\u00fcm mamelekine oran\u0131 ve bunun makul kar\u015f\u0131lanabilecek bir s\u0131n\u0131rda kal\u0131p kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi bilgi ve olgular\u0131n g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Yerel mahkemece murisin temlik etti\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n t\u00fcm mamelekine oran\u0131n\u0131n makul kar\u015f\u0131lanabilecek s\u0131n\u0131rda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015f ise de dosyada mevcut tapu kay\u0131tlar\u0131 incelendi\u011finde murisin d\u00f6rt par\u00e7a ta\u015f\u0131nmazda malik iken bunlardan en de\u011ferli olanlar\u0131n\u0131 daval\u0131 e\u015fine temlik etti\u011fi, geride kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n de\u011ferine g\u00f6re \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma akdine konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n t\u00fcm malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n d\u00f6rtte \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcne yak\u0131n miktarda oldu\u011fu gibi geride kalan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarda murisin tam malik olmay\u0131p dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u015fah\u0131slarla payda\u015f oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Murisin \u00f6zellikle bir par\u00e7a ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 devretmek suretiyle bak\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayabilece\u011fi yerde, ilk temlikten on g\u00fcn sonra ba\u015fka bir ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki pay\u0131n\u0131 da daval\u0131ya temlik etti\u011fi ve bunlar\u0131n sahip oldu\u011fu <strong>en de\u011ferli ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 oldu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde temlikteki as\u0131l irade ve amac\u0131n\u0131n bak\u0131m sa\u011flamak de\u011fil miras\u00e7\u0131dan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rmak oldu\u011fu, b\u00f6yle olunca da yap\u0131lan temlikin muvazaa ile illetli olup iptali gerekti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r&#8230;<\/strong>\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(<\/strong><\/span><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Y<\/span>arg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu E. 2017\/1-1277 K. 2019\/549 T. 09.05.2019)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mirasb\u0131rakan ile davac\u0131 miras\u00e7\u0131lar aras\u0131ndaki darg\u0131nl\u0131k, k\u00fcsk\u00fcnl\u00fck veya di\u011fer olumsuz be\u015fer\u00ee ili\u015fkiler ile lehtar miras\u00e7\u0131y\u0131 kay\u0131rma y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki belirgin e\u011filim. Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda, murisin bir evlad\u0131 ile aras\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a k\u00f6t\u00fc olmas\u0131, mal ka\u00e7\u0131rma saikiyle hareket edildi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir karine te\u015fkil eder.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay. 1. HD, T. 24.4.2018, E. 2015\/10389).<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Evlad\u0131n ebeveynine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 hizmetin ahlaki g\u00f6revin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmas\u0131 ve bu a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 hizmetin bir semen (kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k) olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi, temliki ivazl\u0131 k\u0131lan bir me\u015fruiyet nedeni olarak kabul edilmelidir <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(YHGK, T. 16.06.2010, E. 2010\/1-295, K. 2010\/333).<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>&#8221;Muris muvazaas\u0131na dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131n\u0131n hukuki yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 mutlak butlan oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, bu iddia hi\u00e7bir zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na veya hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcreye tabi de\u011fildir.<\/strong> Zira mutlak butlanla ge\u00e7ersiz k\u0131l\u0131nan bir i\u015flemin zamanla ge\u00e7erlilik kazanmas\u0131 hukuken m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Dava, murisin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden sonra her zaman a\u00e7\u0131labilir.&#8221;<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>\u00a0(Yarg\u0131tay 1. HD, T. 21.03.2016, E. 2014\/14726).<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Muvazaa nedeniyle tapu iptali ve tescil davas\u0131 a\u00e7ma hakk\u0131, murisin k\u00fclli halefi s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 haiz yasal miras\u00e7\u0131lara aittir. Vasiyet alacakl\u0131s\u0131 (belirli mal vasiyeti lehtar\u0131) ise miras\u00e7\u0131 s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131may\u0131p yaln\u0131zca vasiyet bor\u00e7lusuna kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fisel bir talep hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fundan, muvazaa davas\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7makta hukuki yarar\u0131 ve s\u0131fat\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, T. 21.11.2001, E. 958, K. 1035)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre dava \u015fart\u0131 olsa da kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011furan daval\u0131n\u0131n davay\u0131 kabul beyan\u0131na de\u011fer verilmesi gerekir.<\/span> (Yarg.1.HD.2022\/4534 E.2022\/6920 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c&#8230;Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun (TBK) 611. maddesine g\u00f6re, \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, taraflar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 hak ve bor\u00e7lar y\u00fckleyen bir akittir. (818 s. Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun (BK) m. 511). Ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla ivazl\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme t\u00fcrlerindendir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fme konusu mal\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusuna ge\u00e7irme; bak\u0131m bor\u00e7lusu da bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131na yasan\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc anlamda \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131na girer. (TBK 614 (BK) 514)). Di\u011fer yandan; <strong>bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme ko\u015fulu ile yap\u0131lan temliki i\u015flemin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi i\u00e7in s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi tarihte bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zel bak\u0131m gereksinimi i\u00e7erisinde bulunmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir.<\/strong> <strong>Bu gereksinmenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeden sonra do\u011fmas\u0131 ya da alacakl\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne kadar \u00e7ok k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f bulunmas\u0131 da s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine etkili olamaz.<\/strong> Kural olarak, bu t\u00fcr s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayal\u0131 bir temlikin de muvazaa ile illetli oldu\u011funun ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi her zaman m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. En sade anlat\u0131mla muvazaa, irade ile beyan aras\u0131nda kasten yarat\u0131lan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olarak tan\u0131mlanabilir. B\u00f6yle bir iddia kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, as\u0131l olan taraflar\u0131n akitteki ger\u00e7ek ve m\u00fc\u015fterek ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131d\u0131r. (TBK m. 19 (BK m. 18)). \u015eayet bak\u0131m alacakl\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temliki i\u015flemde bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetilme ko\u015fulunun de\u011fil de, bir ba\u015fka amac\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirme iradesini ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenirse (\u00f6rne\u011fin miras\u00e7\u0131lar\u0131ndan mal ka\u00e7\u0131rma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde ise), bu takdirde akdin ivazl\u0131 (bedel kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131) oldu\u011fundan s\u00f6z edilemez; akitte ba\u011f\u0131\u015f amac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst\u00fcn tutuldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131l\u0131r. Bu halde de Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 01.04.1974 g\u00fcn ve 1\/2 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 olayda, uygulama yeri bulur. <strong>Miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n, \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bak\u0131p g\u00f6zetme kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 temlikin muvazaa ile illetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenebilmesi i\u00e7in de, s\u00f6zle\u015fme tarihinde miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n ya\u015f\u0131, fiziki ve genel sa\u011fl\u0131k durumu, aile ko\u015fullar\u0131 ve ili\u015fkileri, elinde bulunan mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n miktar\u0131, temlik edilen mal\u0131n, t\u00fcm mamelekine oran\u0131, bunun makul kar\u015f\u0131lanabilecek bir s\u0131n\u0131rda kal\u0131p kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi bilgi ve olgular\u0131n g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gerekir. S<\/strong>omut olaya gelince, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fkaca ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. \u00a0Ne var ki, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcnceye kadar bakma s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapmaktaki as\u0131l ama\u00e7 ve iradesinin belirlenebilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan temlik d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131yla ilgili yeterli bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, <strong>miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n temlik d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlerinin ke\u015ffen saptan\u0131p, \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n t\u00fcm mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7indeki oran\u0131 belirlenerek temlikin makul s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde kal\u0131p kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, muvazaan\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkeler ve toplanan delillerle birlikte de\u011ferlendirilip has\u0131l olacak sonuca g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi<\/strong> gerekirken&#8230;\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(<\/strong><\/span><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Y<\/span>arg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi E. 2019\/2955 K. 2021\/600 T. 04.02.2021)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDava, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil olmazsa bedel iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir. <strong><u>Davac\u0131,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0\u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 5 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki 23 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc\u00a0<strong><u>kredi temini amac\u0131yla 22.04.2008 tarihinde daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;e devretti\u011fini, bankadan 75.000,00 TL tutar\u0131nda kredi \u00e7ekildi\u011fini, kredi taksitlerinin \u00f6denmesi ile bor\u00e7 bitti\u011finde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tekrar kendisine devredilece\u011fi konusunda daval\u0131 &#8230; ile anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, borcun b\u00fcy\u00fck k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6dendi\u011fini,<\/u><\/strong> i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu mali g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fck nedeniyle kalan taksit \u00f6demelerini aksatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;in kalan kredi borcunu kapatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6dedi\u011fi bedelin kar\u015f\u0131lanaca\u011f\u0131 bildirilmesine ra\u011fmen daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 devretmek istemedi\u011fini, aralar\u0131ndaki inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tesciline, olmazsa ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinin daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.\u00a0<strong><u>Daval\u0131,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<strong><u>davac\u0131 ile aralar\u0131nda inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 bedeli kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda 185.000,00 TL&#8217;ye sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131<\/u><\/strong>, sat\u0131\u015f bedelini elden \u00f6dedi\u011fini, davac\u0131 ve e\u015fini zor durumdan kurtarmak i\u00e7in, iyiniyetli olarak\u00a0<strong><u>75.000,00 TL tutar\u0131nda kredi \u00e7ekti\u011fini, kredi taksitlerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011fini<\/u><\/strong>, kalan taksitlerin \u00f6denmemesi \u00fczerine hakk\u0131nda icra takibi ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve dosya masraflar\u0131 da dahil kalan borcu kendisinin kapatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, zarara u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur. <strong><u>Mahkemece, davac\u0131n\u0131n iddias\u0131n\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil veya delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 ile ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve daval\u0131dan bir alaca\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden; davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 23 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc 22.04.2008 tarihinde 9399 yevmiye numaral\u0131 resmi akit ile daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;e sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik etti\u011fi, daval\u0131n\u0131n Halkbankas\u0131&#8217;ndan ayn\u0131 tarih olan 22.04.2008&#8217;de 75.000,00 TL bedelli konut kredisi \u00e7ekti\u011fi ve 9409 yevmiye numaral\u0131 resmi akit ile dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n ipotek edildi\u011fi, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kredi borcunun \u00f6demelerini yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi k\u0131sma ili\u015fkin 26 adet \u00f6deme dekontu sunuldu\u011fu, bu \u00f6demelerin 23.05.2008 tarihinde ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve 13.04.2011 tarihine kadar s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, tamam\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 &#8230; ad\u0131na yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, toplam \u00f6deme miktar\u0131n\u0131n ise 43.261,36 TL oldu\u011fu, borcun kalan\u0131 i\u00e7inse &#8230; 1. \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc&#8217;n\u00fcn 2013\/1416 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 Halkbankas\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ipote\u011fe dayan\u0131larak takip yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan borcun haricen \u00f6dendi\u011fi, borcun bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011finin daval\u0131n\u0131n da kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Somut olayda, dava konusu 23 numaral\u0131 ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn daval\u0131ya devrinden sonra, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz \u00fczerine ipotek koyulmak suretiyle \u00e7ekilen kredi bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6demelerini davac\u0131 taraf bankaya yat\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olup, buna ili\u015fkin kay\u0131tlarda dosyaya dahil edilmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan bu bir k\u0131s\u0131m \u00f6demeler daval\u0131n\u0131n da kabul\u00fcndedir. Buna g\u00f6re taraflar aras\u0131nda inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesini yaz\u0131l\u0131 delili olmasa da HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 202. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 bulundu\u011fu ku\u015fkusuzdur. B\u00f6yle bir durumda HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 203. maddesi uyar\u0131nca tan\u0131kla hukuki ili\u015fkinin ispat\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/u><\/strong> Ne var ki, mahkemece bu y\u00f6n \u00fczerinde durulmadan yaz\u0131l\u0131 delili bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddedilmesi hatal\u0131 olmu\u015ftur.\u00a0\u201c <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Yarg\u0131tay 1<\/span>.Hukuk Dairesinin 2016\/13714 E. 2020\/1988 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><u>Davac\u0131,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a037 ada 8 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki 2 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc\u00a0<strong><u>23\/02\/2005 tarihinde teminat ama\u00e7l\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;e sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik etti\u011fini, &#8230;&#8217;\u00fcn &#8230;. Bankas\u0131 &#8230; \u015eubesi&#8217;nden 24.02.2005 tarihinde 10 y\u0131l vadeli 30.000,00 TL&#8217;lik konut kredisi kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kredinin ayl\u0131k taksitlerini kendisinin \u00f6dedi\u011fini,<\/u><\/strong> temlik tarihinden bu yana zilyetli\u011finin kesintiye u\u011framad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek, tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tesciline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.\u00a0<strong><u>Daval\u0131, temlikin ger\u00e7ek sat\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu<\/u><\/strong>, davac\u0131 ile aralar\u0131nda kira ili\u015fkisi bulundu\u011funu,\u00a0<strong><u>krediyi ad\u0131na \u00e7ekti\u011fini ve taksitlerini kendisinin \u00f6dedi\u011fini\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>belirterek davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015ftur. <strong><u>Mahkemece, iddian\u0131n kan\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden; \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu 2 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iken, 23.02.2005 tarihinde daval\u0131ya sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik edildi\u011fi, daval\u0131n\u0131n 24.02.2005 tarihinde Ziraat Bankas\u0131 &#8230; \u015eubesi&#8217;nden 10 y\u0131l vadeli 30.000,00 TL&#8217;lik konut kredisi kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r\u2026 <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Somut olaya gelince; \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tamam\u0131 davac\u0131 ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iken, daval\u0131ya temlik edildi\u011fi, temlikten bir g\u00fcn sonra daval\u0131n\u0131n kredi \u00e7ekti\u011fi, kredi \u00f6demelerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 ile o\u011flu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu \u00f6demeleri ili\u015fkin belgelerin delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 hususu dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda mahkemece tan\u0131k dinlenilmesinde bir isabetsizlik yoktur<\/u><\/strong>.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin 2016\/2951 E. 2019\/345 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDava, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde tazminat iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir. <strong><u>Davac\u0131,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a011 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131,\u00a0<strong><u>daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019a daha sonra iade edilmek \u015fart\u0131 ile ihtiyac\u0131 sebebiyle daval\u0131n\u0131n bankadan kredi kullanabilmesi amac\u0131yla devretti\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kredinin geri \u00f6demelerinin e\u015fi ve e\u015finin a\u011fabeyi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131,<\/u><\/strong> daval\u0131n\u0131n aralar\u0131ndaki s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket ederek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 di\u011fer daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019a temlik etti\u011fini, daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019in e\u015finin \u00f6z amcas\u0131n\u0131n o\u011flu olup, aralar\u0131ndaki anla\u015fmay\u0131 bildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, daval\u0131 &#8230; ad\u0131na olan tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile ad\u0131na tescilini, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesini istemi\u015ftir.\u00a0<strong><u>Daval\u0131\u00a0<\/u><\/strong><strong>&#8230;,\u00a0<u>i\u015flemin ger\u00e7ek bir sat\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu, anla\u015f\u0131lan bedelden 45.000,00TL eksik kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in kendi ad\u0131na kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kredinin \u00f6demesinin banka taraf\u0131ndan davac\u0131ya yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem iddias\u0131n\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, sunulan dekontlar\u0131n delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek<\/u><\/strong>, davan\u0131n reddini savunmu\u015f, daval\u0131 &#8230; ise ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 di\u011fer daval\u0131dan 45.000,00 TL kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmi\u015ftir. <strong><u>Mahkemece, ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve toplanan delillerden, davac\u0131n\u0131n 11 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 15.03.2010 tarihinde daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019e sat\u0131\u015f suretiyle temlik etti\u011fi, Kemal\u2019in 12.03.2010 tarihinde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kredi \u00f6demesinin 15.03.2010 tarihinde davac\u0131ya yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bir k\u0131s\u0131m kredinin davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015fi ve e\u015finin a\u011fabeyi taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011fi, kredi taksitlerine mahsuben &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan 03.09.2012 tarihinde 30.250,00TL \u00f6deme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, toplu \u00f6demeden sonra Kemal\u2019in ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 ipoteksiz olarak di\u011fer daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019e 05.10.2012 tarihinde temlik etti\u011fi, &#8230;\u2019in davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015finin kuzeni oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r\u2026 <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131 yanca ibraz edilen ve bir k\u0131s\u0131m \u00f6demelerin davac\u0131 yak\u0131nlar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren dekontlar\u0131n delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u015f\u00fcphesizdir. Bu durumda, HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 202\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince maddi olaya ili\u015fkin tan\u0131k dinlenebilir<\/u><\/strong><strong>. Dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131ndan davac\u0131 ile daval\u0131 &#8230; aras\u0131nda inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakta olup,<\/strong>\u00a0daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019in de davac\u0131n\u0131n e\u015finin kuzeni olmas\u0131 sebebiyle olay\u0131 bilen veya bilebilecek ki\u015filerden oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in iyiniyetli say\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin 2016\/7834 E. 2019\/5556 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDava; inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayal\u0131 olarak dava konusu 320 ada 2 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n 1\/2\u2019sinin iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na tescili, ikinci kademede tazminat istemine ili\u015fkindir.\u00a0<strong><u>Mahkemece, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. H\u00fckm\u00fc, davac\u0131 vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir. <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama, toplanan deliller, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re ve \u00f6zellikle davac\u0131n\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir belge ya da delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 mahiyetinde bir belgeye dayanmamas\u0131na, davac\u0131n\u0131n tescil istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden daval\u0131 tarafa yemin de teklif etmemesine g\u00f6re davac\u0131 vekilinin a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bendin kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, reddi gerekmi\u015ftir. <\/u><\/strong>Davac\u0131n\u0131n ikinci kademedeki yap\u0131lan \u00f6demelerin sebepsiz zenginle\u015fme h\u00fck\u00fcmleri gere\u011fince istirdat\u0131 istemine y\u00f6nelik temyiz itirazlar\u0131na gelince; Davac\u0131 dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n al\u0131m\u0131na ili\u015fkin konut kredi taksitlerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n kendisi taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011fine ili\u015fkin dekontlar, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00f6nceki malikine yap\u0131lan pe\u015finat \u00f6demesine ili\u015fkin bloke \u00e7ek ile emlak hizmet bedeli olarak yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti\u011fi \u00f6demeye ili\u015fkin olarak sundu\u011fu belgelere dayanarak ayr\u0131ca ta\u015f\u0131nmazda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi faydal\u0131 ve zorunlu masraflar nedeniyle tazminat isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur. <strong><u>Daval\u0131 taraf ise sadece bir k\u0131s\u0131m konut kredi taksitlerinin davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a \u00f6dendi\u011fini kabul etmi\u015f, ne var ki bu durumun daval\u0131 lehine ba\u011f\u0131\u015flama oldu\u011funu savunmu\u015ftur. <\/u><\/strong>Gerek\u00e7eli kararda, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemde taraflar\u0131n birlikte ya\u015famas\u0131 nedeniyle daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n savunmas\u0131na itibar edilerek kredi taksitleri \u00f6demelerinin ba\u011f\u0131\u015flama saiki ile yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, faydal\u0131 ve zorunlu masraflara y\u00f6nelik istemin de ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esi ile reddine karar verilmi\u015f, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n kabul etmedi\u011fi di\u011fer bir k\u0131s\u0131m \u00f6demeler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise herhangi bir gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilmeden istemin reddine karar verildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u2026 <strong><u>Davac\u0131n\u0131n konut kredisinin birbirini izleyen kredi taksit d\u00f6nemlerindeki \u00f6demelerin yar\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n da kabul\u00fcnde olup bu \u00f6demelerin davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131\u015flama saiki ile yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc hatal\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeye dayal\u0131d\u0131r. Dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bankaya davac\u0131n\u0131n her kredi taksit \u00f6demesinde taraflar aras\u0131nda elden ba\u011f\u0131\u015flama iradesinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na da ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/u><\/strong>\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 14.Hukuk Dairesinin 2014\/11018 E. 2014\/5837 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131-Yarg\u0131tay 3.Hukuk Dairesinin 2024\/14 E. 2024\/4292 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 )<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cDava, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemden kaynaklanan tapu iptali ve tescil ikinci kademede tazminat istemine ili\u015fkindir. <strong><u>Davac\u0131 vekili,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0<strong><u>daval\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcvekkilinin babas\u0131 oldu\u011funu<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0261 ada 1 parsel B blok no 22 numaral\u0131\u00a0<strong><u>ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn 17.05.2010 tarihinde sat\u0131c\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;ndan 255.000 TL bedel ile davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak, tapuda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131 babas\u0131 ad\u0131na tescil ettirildi\u011fini belirterek<\/u><\/strong> tapu iptali ve tescil, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde \u00f6denen 255.000 TL&#8217;nin g\u00fcncel bedelinin davac\u0131ya \u00f6denmesini talep ve dava etmi\u015ftir.\u00a0<strong><u>Daval\u0131 vekili, davac\u0131n\u0131n iddialar\u0131n\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille ispat etmesi gerekti\u011fini, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan ederek\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>davan\u0131n reddini talep etmi\u015ftir. <strong><u>Mahkemece, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. H\u00fckm\u00fc, davac\u0131 vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir\u2026 <\/u><\/strong><strong><u>Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131, dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin 255.000 TL oldu\u011funu sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin kendisi taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n dosyaya sunmu\u015f oldu\u011fu 17.05.2010 tarihli Garanti Bankas\u0131 dekontundan davac\u0131n\u0131n hesab\u0131ndan sat\u0131c\u0131 &#8230; hesab\u0131na 255.000 TL bedelin havale edildi\u011fi, sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n i\u015flem tarihi olan 17.05.2010 tarihinde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi senetten ve tapu kay\u0131tlar\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Tan\u0131k olarak dinlenen sat\u0131c\u0131 &#8230; sat\u0131\u015f bedelini davac\u0131dan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 18.11.2015 tarihli celsede beyan etmi\u015ftir. Bu durumda davac\u0131 sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin kendisi taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6dendi\u011fini ispatlad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f<\/u><\/strong>, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebeple bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 14.Hukuk Dairesinin 2016\/16180 E. 2017\/7615 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;\u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 1. Hukuk Dairesinin 19\/10\/2021 tarihli ve 2020\/968 E., 2021\/1441 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131 hususunda davac\u0131n\u0131n satma iradesinin bulundu\u011fu, <strong>resmi senette sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin nakden ve tam olarak al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu<\/strong>, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6denmedi\u011fi, bedelin sat\u0131\u015ftan hemen sonra \u00f6denece\u011fi konusunda iradesinin fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 6. ve HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 190. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle, davac\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 353\/1.b.1 maddesi uyar\u0131nca esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine, toplanan delillere, karar\u0131n (IV\/3.) numaral\u0131 bendinde yer verilen B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 yasal ve hukuksal gerek\u00e7eye ve \u00f6zellikle delillerin takdirinde bir isabetsizlik bulunmamas\u0131na g\u00f6re; yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesinde bir isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD 2022\/53 E., 2022\/2294 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131 ile; davac\u0131lar\u0131n taraflar aras\u0131nda kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan sat\u0131\u015f bedellerinden hisselerine d\u00fc\u015fen tutar\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmedi\u011fi, eksik \u00f6deme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi, <strong>resmi sat\u0131\u015f senetlerinde ise davac\u0131lar\u0131n hisselerine d\u00fc\u015fen sat\u0131\u015f bedellerini nakden ve pe\u015fin olarak ald\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 beyan ettikleri,<\/strong> <strong>Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 200. ve 201. maddeleri gere\u011fince miktar ve de\u011feri itibari ile kesin delille ispat\u0131 gereken davac\u0131lar\u0131n iddias\u0131n\u0131n, resmi senetteki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tersinin davac\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan ayn\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7te ba\u015fka bir delil ile kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi,<\/strong> davac\u0131lar<br \/>\ntaraf\u0131ndan ayn\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7te ba\u015fka bir delilin ibraz edilmedi\u011fi, yemin deliline de dayanmad\u0131klar\u0131, davan\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fi belirlenerek davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.&#8221; \/Onama\/ <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD. 2024\/5807 E.2025\/517 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Daval\u0131n\u0131n ve tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n evin e\u015fyal\u0131 olarak 190.000,00 TL&#8217;ye al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirdikleri ve buna ili\u015fkin dekont sunduklar\u0131, Hukuk Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 29.03.2022 tarihli ve 2018\/14-402 Esas, 2022\/391 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda <strong>evin gezilip g\u00f6r\u00fclmeden sat\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu<\/strong> y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki h\u00fckm\u00fc birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;in, vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmedi\u011fi veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD. 2023\/3894 E.2024\/4500 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Dairenin 28.09.2022 tarihli ve 2022\/4667E. 2022\/6201K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile 6763 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 43. maddesi ile de\u011fi\u015fik 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 373. maddesinin 5. f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden, temyiz incelemesinin yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere dosyan\u0131n g\u00f6revli Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kuruluna g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi, Hukuk <strong>Genel Kurulu 15.11.2023 tarihli 2022\/1-1100E. 2023\/1096K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile,<\/strong> davac\u0131 hile ile iradesinin sakatland\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispat y\u00fck\u00fc alt\u0131nda oldu\u011fundan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kendisine devredilmesini gerektiren ger\u00e7ek ve kabul edilebilir bir ba\u015fka sebebin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015feklindeki ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fc hatal\u0131 \u015fekilde ters \u00e7eviren gerek\u00e7esinde isabet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n taraflar aras\u0131nda ihtilaf do\u011fduktan sonraki s\u00fcrece dair ve duyuma dayal\u0131 ifadelerde bulunduklar\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n bankan\u0131n kredi ba\u015fvurusunu reddetti\u011finden bahisle kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n iradesini sakatlayarak onu ikna etti\u011fine dair bilgi ve g\u00f6rg\u00fc aktarmad\u0131klar\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na bu iddiay\u0131 ispata elveri\u015fli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tam tersine davac\u0131n\u0131n ayn\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazda pek \u00e7ok d\u00fckk\u00e2n\u0131n sahibi oldu\u011fu, baz\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 satarak devretti\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferinin ne oldu\u011funu ve 70.000,00TL tutar\u0131ndaki bir kredi i\u00e7in ne de\u011ferde bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n teminat g\u00f6sterilmesi gerekti\u011fini bilebilecek konumda oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131 daval\u0131n\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f i\u00e7in hi\u00e7bir bedel \u00f6demedi\u011fini ve kredi i\u015flemlerini m\u00fcteakip dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 iade edece\u011fi konusunda kendisini hile ile kand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015fse de daval\u0131n\u0131n, davac\u0131ya ait in\u015faata gerek emek ve mesai sarf ederek gerekse maddi k\u00fclfetlerin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 bizzat \u00fcstlenerek destek oldu\u011fu hususu davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131 da d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere dinlenen tan\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan do\u011fruland\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fcstelik davac\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n sonradan bu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 kendisine iade edip zaten ba\u011f\u0131\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 daha k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck bir d\u00fckk\u00e2n\u0131 \u00fczerine alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyerek kand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesine ra\u011fmen, bu durumu \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini kabul etti\u011fi andan sonra daval\u0131 ile bir araya geldi\u011fi ve <strong>dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n daval\u0131ya ait oldu\u011funu tan\u0131klar huzurunda tekrar beyan etti\u011fi ve ke\u015fif s\u0131ras\u0131nda da tespit olundu\u011fu \u00fczere bu yer d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn salonunun bir par\u00e7as\u0131 gibi kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131ndan buna dair kullan\u0131m\u0131n ne \u015fekilde yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131na dair bir anla\u015fmaya imza att\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n ak\u0131l sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yerinde oldu\u011fu ve bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi kendi r\u0131zas\u0131 ile \u015fahitler huzurunda imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131, hile ile elinden al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen bir mal i\u00e7in ki\u015finin b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/strong> davac\u0131n\u0131n kendi r\u0131zas\u0131 ile k\u0131smen ba\u011f\u0131\u015f iradesi k\u0131smen de maddi deste\u011fi kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 daval\u0131ya devretti\u011fi, dosya kapsam\u0131 itibar\u0131yla devrin hile ile sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle bozulmu\u015ftur.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD 2024\/2843 E.2024\/4994 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cVekil \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zeterek, sadakat ve \u00f6zenle y\u00fcr\u00fctmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Vek\u00e2letin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse, g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. (TBK&#8217;nin 504\/1) S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vekaletin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur. Hatta malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. <strong>Vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekil de\u011finilen maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olur<\/strong>. Bu sorumluluk BK&#8217;de daha hafif olan i\u015f\u00e7inin sorumlulu\u011funa k\u0131yasen belirlenirken, TBK&#8217;de benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcslenen basiretli bir vekilin sorumlulu\u011fu esas al\u0131narak daha da a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin; 2021\/1744 E, 2021\/7101 K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>\u201c<\/em>Yukar\u0131daki h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca vekilin, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131nda olaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Vek\u00e2letin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 504 \u00fcnc\u00fc maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vek\u00e2letin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur.\u00a0<strong>Vekil bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirmedi\u011fi, \u00f6zellikle vek\u00e2leti kasten vekil edenin zarar\u0131na, kendisinin veya ba\u015fka birinin yarar\u0131na kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla b\u00f6yle bir durumda vekil eden zararland\u0131r\u0131l\u0131rken, vekil \u00e7ok zaman kendisine veya ba\u015fka bir kimseye \u00e7\u0131kar sa\u011flamaktad\u0131r.\u00a0<\/strong>Oysa ki, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunun temel amac\u0131 ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na i\u015f g\u00f6ren kimsenin yetkisini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanma riskini \u00f6nlemektir. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, g\u00fcven esas\u0131na dayal\u0131 bir i\u015f g\u00f6rme edimi ihtiva etti\u011finden bu g\u00fcvenin korunmas\u0131 her \u015feyden \u00f6nce 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 506 nc\u0131 maddesinin bir gere\u011fi oldu\u011fu gibi 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 2 nci maddesinde ifadesini bulan d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n da bir gere\u011fidir. Uygulamada vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 durumlar\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zellikle vekilin satmakla yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferine nazaran \u00e7ok d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bir bedelle satarak devretti\u011fi h\u00e2llerde yo\u011funla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Ancak, Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 19.12.2019 tarihli ve 2017\/1-1272 Esas, 2019\/1399 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6zard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. Vekilin, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde belirtilen yetkilerin d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131, vekil edenin talimat\u0131na uygun hareket etmemesi ve onun yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapmas\u0131 durumunda de\u011finilen maddeler uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 2023\/292 E, 2024\/531 K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c\u2026<strong> Vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 davalarda kural olarak ispat k\u00fclfeti davac\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015fmektedir.<\/strong> Vekilden ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 satan alan &#8230;\u2019in vekil ile el ve &#8230; birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde <strong>vekil edeni zararland\u0131rma kast\u0131yla hareket etti\u011fi<\/strong>ni ve &#8230;\u2019ten sat\u0131n alan &#8230;\u2019nin de ediniminde k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli oldu\u011funu ispat y\u00fck\u00fc davac\u0131 taraftad\u0131r. Vekilin, vekalet verene kar\u015f\u0131 sorumlulu\u011fu \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde bedeli \u00f6dedi\u011fini ispat k\u00fclfeti ise vekildedir\u201d\u00a0 <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin, 2021\/ 6910 E, 2023 \/ 3013 K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131; \u201dDairenin 30.11.2020 tarihli ve 2019\/3113 Esas, 2020\/6337 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 )<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun temsil ve vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesini d\u00fczenleyen h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcvenine dayan\u0131r. Vekilin bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7o\u011fu bu g\u00fcven unsurundan, onun vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun davran\u0131\u015f y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011far. Bor\u00e7lar Kanununda sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vekil edene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve 390\/2 maddesinde &#8220;vekil, m\u00fcvekkiline kar\u015f\u0131 vek\u00e2leti h\u00fcsn\u00fcniyetle ifa ile m\u00fckelleftir&#8230;&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vek\u00e2letin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur. Hatta malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6zard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, <strong>makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez.<\/strong> Vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekil de\u011finilen maddenin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olur. \u00d6te yandan, <strong>vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi Medeni Kanunun 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar.<\/strong> Vekil vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vek\u00e2let eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz. Ne var ki, <strong>\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olup vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, Medeni Kanunun 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong> S\u00f6z konusu yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan h\u00e2kim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fc niyeti te\u015fvik etmek en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahk\u00fbm edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hemen belirtilmelidir ki, 07.12.1940 tarih 20\/87 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere aksi taraflarca kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131k\u00e7a yahut halin icab\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131k\u00e7a temsil yetkisi; m\u00fcmessilin (vekilin) veya temsil edilenin (vekil edenin) \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc, gaiplik h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn ilan\u0131 veya vekil ya da vekil edenin yahut her ikisinin iflas ilan etmeleri veyahut da medeni haklar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 yetene\u011finin kaybedilmesi gibi hallerde son bulaca\u011f\u0131 gibi (B.K. 35, 397. Md.) vek\u00e2letten istifa ve azil de (B.K. 396.Md) temsil yetkisini sona erdiren nedenlerdendir. \u00d6te yandan, T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 45 (B.K. 37), T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 514. (B.K. 388) maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fcnce m\u00fcmessil <strong>(vekil) kendi salahiyetinin son buldu\u011funa vak\u0131f olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcddet\u00e7e, temsil edilen (vekil eden) yahut halefleri bu yetki hen\u00fcz baki imi\u015f gibi vekilin muamelesi ile alacakl\u0131 veya bor\u00e7lu olurlar.<\/strong> Ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle vekilin vek\u00e2leten yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tasarruf veya tasarruflardan vekil edenin sorumlu olmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in vekilin vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin sona erdi\u011fini bilmesi gerekir. Bunun yan\u0131 s\u0131ra Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 37\/2.maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca vekil ile i\u015flem yapan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin de bu tasarruftan kaynaklanan elde ettikleri haklar\u0131n korunabilmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan vekilin yetkisinin son buldu\u011funu bilmemeleri gerekir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi&#8217;nin 2016\/12579 E., 2016\/11233 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; hukukumuzda, di\u011fer \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde oldu\u011fu gibi ki\u015filerin huzur ve g\u00fcven i\u00e7erisinde al\u0131\u015f veri\u015fte bulunmalar\u0131 sat\u0131n ald\u0131klar\u0131 \u015feylerin ilerde kendilerinden al\u0131nabilece\u011fi endi\u015felerini ta\u015f\u0131mamalar\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flamak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle, alan ki\u015finin iyi niyetinin korunmas\u0131 ilkesi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu ama\u00e7la Medeni Kanunun 2.maddesinin genel h\u00fckm\u00fc yan\u0131nda menkul mallarda 988 ve 989, tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesinde ise 1023.maddesinin \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmleri getirilmi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan bir devleti olu\u015fturan unsurlardan biri insan unsuru ise bunun kadar \u00f6nemli olan \u00f6tekisi toprakt\u0131r \u0130\u015fte bu nedenle Devlet, n\u00fcfus sicilleri gibi tapu sicillerinin de tutulmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmi\u015f, bunlar\u0131n alenili\u011fini (herkese a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131n\u0131) sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f, iyi ve do\u011fru tutulmamas\u0131ndan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011fu kabul etmi\u015f, de\u011finilen t\u00fcm bu sebeplerin do\u011fal sonucu olarak da tapuya itimat edip, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal edinen ki\u015finin iyi niyetini korumak zorunlulu\u011funu duymu\u015ftur. Belirtilen ilke M.K.nun 1023.maddesinde aynen &#8220;tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki sicile iyi niyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya ba\u015fka bir ayni hak kazanan 3 nc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur&#8221; \u015feklinde yer alm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 ilke tamamlay\u0131c\u0131 madde niteli\u011findeki 1024.maddenin 1.f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re &#8220;Bir ayni hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f ise bunu bilen veya bilmesi gereken \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi bu tescile dayanamaz&#8221; bi\u00e7iminde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ne var ki; tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n intikallerinde, huzur ve g\u00fcveni koruma, toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flama u\u011fruna, tapu kayd\u0131nda ismi ge\u00e7meyen ama as\u0131l malik olan\u0131n hakk\u0131 feda edildi\u011finden iktisapta bulunan ki\u015finin, iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak tespiti b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten bir yanda tapu sicilinin do\u011frulu\u011funa inanarak iktisapta bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren kimse di\u011fer yanda ise kendisi i\u00e7in maddi, hatta baz\u0131 hallerde manevi b\u00fcy\u00fck de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131yan ayni hakk\u0131n\u0131 yitirme tehlikesi ile kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalan \u00f6nceki malik bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle y\u00fczeysel ve \u015fekilci bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck ma\u011fduriyetlere yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131, ki\u015filerin Devlete ve adalete olan g\u00fcven ve sayg\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sarsaca\u011f\u0131 ve yasa koyucunun amac\u0131n\u0131n ilk bak\u0131\u015fta, \u015feklen iyi niyetli g\u00f6z\u00fckeni de\u011fil, ger\u00e7ekten iyiniyetli olan ki\u015fiyi korumak oldu\u011fu hususlar\u0131n\u0131n daima g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131, bu y\u00f6nde t\u00fcm delillerin toplan\u0131p derinli\u011fine irdelenmesi ve de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Nitekim bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften hareketle <strong>&#8220;k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n def&#8217;i de\u011fil itiraz oldu\u011fu, iddia ve m\u00fcdafaan\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131na tabii olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her zaman ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fi ve mahkemece kendili\u011fin den (resen) nazara al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131<\/strong> ilkeleri 08.11.1991 tarih l990\/4 esas l99l\/3 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130nan\u00e7lar\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda kabul edilmi\u015f, bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerde ayn\u0131 do\u011frultuda geli\u015fmi\u015ftir. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca, dahili daval\u0131 &#8230; Bankas\u0131n\u0131n TMK\u2019n\u0131n 1023. maddesinin koruyuculu\u011fundan yararlan\u0131p yararlanamayaca\u011f\u0131 hususunda inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131larak sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken bu y\u00f6nde bir hukuki de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n eksik inceleme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi&#8217;nin 2021\/8633 E., 2021\/7653 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ayr\u0131ca, davac\u0131, davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmaza ili\u015fkin olarak daval\u0131lar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu eylem ve i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi zarar\u0131n \u00f6detilmesi isteminde bulunmu\u015f, mahkemece, istemin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015f ise de, yasal ve yarg\u0131sal uygulamalar gere\u011fince, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131 hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak sald\u0131r\u0131ya u\u011frayan kimsenin manevi tazminat \u00f6detilmesini isteyebilece\u011fi, <strong>vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 iddias\u0131nda, davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 olarak nitelendirilemeyece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden<\/strong> manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011filse de an\u0131lan bu husus daval\u0131n\u0131n temyizi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesi&#8217;nin 2014\/7758 E., 2016\/3104 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 05.02.1947 tarihli ve 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131ndan almaktad\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu kararda; eski hukuka g\u00f6re m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ve ge\u00e7erli olan muvazaa ve nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear iddialar\u0131n\u0131n, Medeni Kanun\u2019un y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden sonra ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallar hakk\u0131nda dinlenip dinlenemeyece\u011fi tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. An\u0131lan kararda; \u00e7e\u015fitli sebep ve ama\u00e7larla bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz kayd\u0131na ger\u00e7ek malik yerine ba\u015fka bir nam ve bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede akitlerden biri yerine \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir \u015fahs\u0131n g\u00f6sterilmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu, bu gibi h\u00e2llerde vekilin kendi nam\u0131na ve m\u00fcvekkili hesab\u0131na yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tasarruflarda oldu\u011fu gibi hukuki bir durum veya herhangi bir maksatla \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131slardan ger\u00e7e\u011fi gizleme gayesi g\u00fcd\u00fclebilece\u011fi, &#8220;k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli ve haks\u0131z gizlemeler&#8221; d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, belirtilen olas\u0131l\u0131klara g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131lacak bir davan\u0131n, ger\u00e7ekten, ya mevcut bir hakka dayanarak bir el de\u011fi\u015ftirme veya bir hakk\u0131n korunmas\u0131 niteli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131; bu durumda, halefiyeti d\u00fczeltme amac\u0131yla \u00f6ncelikle m\u00fclkiyetin vekile aidiyeti d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclse bile, temsil h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan bunun korunmas\u0131 ve devam\u0131na h\u00fckmolunamayaca\u011f\u0131, zira Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun &#8220;m\u00fcvekkil vekiline kar\u015f\u0131 muhtelif bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 ifa edince vekilin kendi nam\u0131na ve m\u00fcvekkili hesab\u0131na \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131staki alaca\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcvekkilin olur&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi do\u011frulad\u0131\u011f\u0131na de\u011finildikten sonra sonu\u00e7 olarak;<strong> nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear davalar\u0131n\u0131n dinlenebilir oldu\u011funa ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulundu\u011fu<\/strong>na karar verilmi\u015ftir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem, inanan\u0131n (itimat edenin) bir hakk\u0131n\u0131 belirli bir s\u00fcre veya ama\u00e7la inan\u0131lana ge\u00e7irmeyi, inan\u0131lan\u0131n da inanan\u0131n emir ve talimatlar\u0131na g\u00f6re kullan\u0131p ama\u00e7 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fince veya s\u00fcre dolunca hakk\u0131 tekrar inanana devretmeyi y\u00fcklendi\u011fi s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler olarak tan\u0131mlanabilir <em>(\u00d6zkaya, E.: \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 \u0130\u015flem ve Muvazaa Davalar\u0131, Ankara 2004, s. 25).<\/em> Yarg\u0131sal kararlarda ise inan\u00e7l\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme, inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131n elde etti\u011fi hakk\u0131, taraflarca g\u00fcd\u00fclen ama\u00e7 sona erdikten veya belirli bir s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra inanana veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye devretme taahh\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7eren bir anla\u015fma olarak tarif edilmi\u015ftir<em> (HGK, 13.5.1992 tarihli ve 1992\/14-249 E, 1992\/323 K ).<\/em> \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile inanan (itimat eden) bir m\u00fclkiyet veya alacak hakk\u0131n\u0131 inan\u0131lana (mutemede) devretmekte, bor\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile de inan\u0131lan ki\u015finin hak ve yetkilerini s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131rmakt\u0131r. \u0130nan\u0131lan hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131rken kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan ko\u015fullara uymay\u0131, ama\u00e7 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fince veya s\u00fcre dolunca tekrar hakk\u0131 inanana iade etmeyi y\u00fck\u00fcmlenmektedir. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemler gibi bu i\u015flemlerin hangi zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi tutulacaklar\u0131 da Kanunumuzda d\u00fczenlenmemi\u015ftir. <strong>Gerek bilimsel alanda gerekse uygulamada, inan\u00e7 konusunun iadesine, inan\u00e7 konusu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye devredilmi\u015f, inan\u0131lan elinden \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015fsa tazminat talebine ili\u015fkin dava hakk\u0131n\u0131n 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun (BK) 125. maddesindeki 10 y\u0131ll\u0131k zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi oldu\u011fu kabul edilmektedir. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihte, ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla inan\u00e7 konusu \u015feyin iadesi gerekti\u011fi tarihte i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. \u0130ade tarihi hen\u00fcz gelmemi\u015f inan\u0131lan, inan\u00e7 konusunu elinde tutmakta hakl\u0131 ise zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131na imk\u00e2n yoktur<\/strong> <em>(Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 15.04.2011 tarihli, 2011\/13-14 E., 2011\/189 K. ve 29.01.2014 tarihli, 2013\/11-376 E., 2014\/49 K. say\u0131l\u0131).<\/em> Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ise m\u00fclga 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 386. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda \u201cVek\u00e2let, bir akittir ki onunla vekil, mukavele dairesinde kendisine tahmil olunan i\u015fin idaresini veya takabb\u00fcl eyledi\u011fi hizmetin ifas\u0131n\u0131 iltizam eyler.\u201d \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile vekil, m\u00fcvekkiline kar\u015f\u0131 i\u015f g\u00f6rme borcu alt\u0131na girer. Bu bir hizmet edimi, geni\u015f anlamda i\u015f edimi, bir ba\u015fkas\u0131 lehine faaliyet de olabilir. Hukuki fiillere ili\u015fkin vek\u00e2lette vekil, m\u00fcvekkilinin menfaatine olarak hukuki i\u015flemler ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmek, \u00f6zellikle subjektif haklar iktisap etmek, kullanmak ve devretmeyi y\u00fck\u00fcmlenir <em>(Yal\u00e7\u0131nduran T.: Vekalet S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde \u00dccret, Ankara 2007, s. 35)<\/em>. Bu tan\u0131mlamadan vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin unsurlar\u0131: vekilin, bir i\u015f g\u00f6rme borcunu \u00fcstlenmesi; i\u015f g\u00f6rme borcunun, ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n menfaatine yap\u0131lmas\u0131; i\u015f g\u00f6rme borcunun, <strong>m\u00fcvekkilin iradesine uygun olarak yerine getirilmesi; vekilin, edim sonucunu de\u011fil, edim fiilini \u00fcstlenmesi;<\/strong> vekilin, i\u015f g\u00f6rme borcunu yerine getirirken ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z hareket etmesi; \u00fccret (ki bu unsur zorunlu de\u011fildir) bi\u00e7iminde s\u0131ralanabilir. Kural olarak vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin kapsam\u0131, Bor\u00e7lar Hukukumuzun genel h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ve genel ilkelere ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak taraflar\u0131n r\u0131zalar\u0131na g\u00f6re belirlenir. Ancak, \u015fahsa s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131 haklar\u0131n vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin konusunu olu\u015fturmas\u0131 hukuken olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir. S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ilkesi gere\u011fi bu emredici kural d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan her konuda vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yap\u0131labilir. E\u011fer, taraflar\u0131n iradeleri s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kapsam\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi konusunda yol g\u00f6sterici de\u011fil ise veya s\u00f6zle\u015fmede bu hususa de\u011finilmemi\u015f ise BK\u2019n\u0131n 388. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenlemesine g\u00f6re s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kapsam\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu (taalluk eyledi\u011fi) i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenecektir. Eldeki davan\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde \u00f6zellikle <strong>vekilin, vekil edene \u201chesap verme borcu\u201d<\/strong> \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. BK\u2019n\u0131n 392. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca, <strong>m\u00fcvekkilin istemi h\u00e2linde vekil, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi konusu olan ve yapm\u0131\u015f bulundu\u011fu i\u015fin hesab\u0131n\u0131 ona vermek durumundad\u0131r.<\/strong> Bu bor\u00e7, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin kurulmas\u0131 ile do\u011far ve mutlak surette s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir, h\u00e2lin icab\u0131na g\u00f6re s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin sona ermesinden sonra da devam edebilir. <strong>Hesap verme borcu, vekilin g\u00f6reviyle ilgili mali konularda, daha a\u00e7\u0131k bir anlat\u0131mla ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 mal veya paralar, yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 harcamalar hakk\u0131nda ve ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 avans ve masraflar\u0131 nerelerde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131nda hesap vermek ve buna ait belgeleri m\u00fcvekkile ibraz etmek zorunlulu\u011funu getirir.<\/strong> Bu, bir anlam\u0131yla sadakat borcunun gere\u011fi olarak bilgi vermek y\u00fck\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn de bir t\u00fcr\u00fcd\u00fcr. Hesap verme borcu vekilin ba\u015fkas\u0131na ait bir i\u015f g\u00f6rmesinin do\u011fal sonucudur; ger\u00e7ekten, <strong>i\u015fi g\u00f6r\u00fclen kimsenin (m\u00fcvekkilin) i\u015fe ba\u015flan\u0131p ba\u015flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015fin nas\u0131l y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ve sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmeye ihtiyac\u0131 vard\u0131r.<\/strong> B\u00f6ylece hesap verme borcu, geni\u015f anlam\u0131nda, genel bir bilgi verme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olarak kendini g\u00f6stermektedir. <strong>Vekil sadece i\u015fin sonunda de\u011fil, y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda da durumdan m\u00fcvekkile bilgi vermek zorundad\u0131r.<\/strong> Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde vekilin <strong>hesap verme borcu, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin kurulmas\u0131yla birlikte do\u011fup; i\u015fin vekil taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ve sona ermesinde devam eder.<\/strong> S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ifa edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 bir husus de\u011fildir. Ayr\u0131ca, gerekti\u011finde, bu bor\u00e7, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin sona ermesinden sonra da devam etmektedir. \u00d6yle ki, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi sona erdikten sonra, m\u00fcvekkil, vekilden hesap vermenin yinelenmesini isterse, vekil, bu borcu tekrar yerine getirmek durumundad\u0131r. <strong>Ancak, bu durumda m\u00fcvekkil, vekilin bu hususta yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 masraflar\u0131 ve bu i\u015f i\u00e7in harcad\u0131\u011f\u0131 eme\u011fin \u00fccretini vekile verecektir<\/strong>. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kapsam\u0131nda somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131 dava dilek\u00e7esinde ve 27.09.2013 tarihli \u00f6n inceleme duru\u015fmas\u0131nda daval\u0131y\u0131 dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131n almas\u0131 konusunda vek\u00e2letname ile yetkilendirdi\u011fi ve para g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi h\u00e2lde daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 kendi ad\u0131na sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131yla tapu iptali ve tescil talep etti\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olayda inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden kaynaklanan tapu iptali ve tescil istemi de\u011fil, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil isteminde bulunuldu\u011fu Hukuk Genel Kurulunca kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Gelinen bu noktada zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 kavram\u0131 ve vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresi uygulamas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda k\u0131sa bir a\u00e7\u0131klama yapmak yerinde olacakt\u0131r. \u00d6zel hukukta teknik bir kavram olan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, bir hakk\u0131n kazan\u0131lmas\u0131nda veya kaybedilmesinde yasan\u0131n kabul etmi\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00fcrenin t\u00fckenmesi anlam\u0131na gelmektedir. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, kanunun belirledi\u011fi s\u00fcreler i\u00e7erisinde hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmamas\u0131 sebebiyle dava ve icra kabiliyetini, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n defii ile kaybettiren ve haklar \u00fczerinde etki yapan kanuni sukut sebebidir. Borcun zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011framas\u0131yla alacak sona ermeyecek alacakl\u0131n\u0131n dava yolu ile alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 elde etme imk\u00e2n\u0131 ortadan kalkacakt\u0131r. Bir ba\u015fka ifade ile bor\u00e7 eksik bir bor\u00e7 (do\u011fal bor\u00e7=obligatio naturalis) h\u00e2line gelecektir. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frayan alaca\u011f\u0131n tahsili hususunda devlet kendi g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fc kullanmaktan vazge\u00e7mekte, b\u00f6ylece s\u00f6z konusu alaca\u011f\u0131n \u00f6denip \u00f6denmemesi keyfiyeti bor\u00e7lunun iradesine b\u0131rak\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Ancak belirtmek gerekir ki, alaca\u011f\u0131n salt zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, onun eksik bir borca d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fmesi i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir; bunun i\u00e7in bor\u00e7lunun, kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>alacak davas\u0131nda alacakl\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 defini ileri s\u00fcrmesi gerekir. Aksi h\u00e2lde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 defii h\u00e2kim taraf\u0131ndan resen dikkate al\u0131namaz.<\/strong><\/span> Bu konuda BK\u2019n\u0131n 140. maddesinde \u2018M\u00fcruruzaman dermeyan edilmedi\u011fi surette hakim, m\u00fcruruzaman\u0131 kendili\u011finden nazara alamaz.\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi bir borcun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131, borcun muaccel olmas\u0131, borcun muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihten ba\u015flayarak kanundaki belirli s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesi olarak say\u0131labilir. Ancak bu \u00fc\u00e7 \u015fart\u0131n bir araya gelmesiyle birlikte zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresi ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f olur ve zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 defini \u00f6ne s\u00fcren daval\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n alacak hakk\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fmu\u015f oldu\u011funu, ancak zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in edimi ifa etmek zorunda olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015f olur ve b\u00f6ylece davan\u0131n reddini sa\u011flayabilir. Hemen belirtmelidir ki zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin ge\u00e7ti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcren bor\u00e7lu (daval\u0131), ayn\u0131 zamanda bu s\u00fcrenin doldu\u011funu da kan\u0131tlama y\u00fck\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Kanunda hangi haklar\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frayaca\u011f\u0131, hangilerinin u\u011framayaca\u011f\u0131 belirli bir sistem h\u00e2linde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f de\u011fildir. Mevcut hukuk d\u00fczeni ve mevzuata g\u00f6re, bor\u00e7lar, ticaret, e\u015fya ve kamu hukukundan kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f olsun b\u00fct\u00fcn alacaklar zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabidir. BK\u2019n\u0131n 125. maddesinde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 ve s\u00fcresiyle ilgili genel bir h\u00fck\u00fcm sevk edilmi\u015ftir. Bu madde h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re; \u201cBu kanunda <strong>ba\u015fka bir suretle h\u00fck\u00fcm mevcut olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde her dava on senelik m\u00fcruru zamana tabidir.<\/strong>\u201d denilmi\u015ftir. BK&#8217;n\u0131n 128. maddesinde s\u00f6zle\u015fmeden do\u011fan alacak haklar\u0131nda<strong> zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, ilke olarak alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu anda i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar<\/strong> denilmek suretiyle vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <strong>Temerr\u00fct tarihi bu bak\u0131mdan \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maz.<\/strong> Buradaki \u201cmuacceliyet\u201d kavram\u0131, alacakl\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan talep ve dava edilebilir h\u00e2le gelmi\u015f olma anlam\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, \u00f6ncelikle do\u011fmu\u015f bir alaca\u011f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerekir. Ancak, <strong>alaca\u011f\u0131n muacceliyeti bir ihbar \u015fart\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 ise zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 bu ihbar\u0131n yap\u0131labilece\u011fi andan itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/strong> Ger\u00e7ekten, BK\u2019n\u0131n 128. maddesine g\u00f6re, m\u00fcruruzaman alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu zamanda ba\u015flar, alaca\u011f\u0131n muacceliyeti bir ihbar vukuuna tabi ise m\u00fcruruzaman bu haberin verilebilece\u011fi g\u00fcnden itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar. BK\u2019n\u0131n 101. maddesi gere\u011fince, borcun muaccel olmas\u0131, ifa zaman\u0131n\u0131n gelmi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131 ifade eder. Borcun ifas\u0131 hen\u00fcz istenemiyorsa, muaccel bir bor\u00e7tan s\u00f6z edilemez. BK\u2019n\u0131n 74. maddesi gere\u011fince borcun yerine getirilmesi bir s\u00fcreye ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015fsa, borcun do\u011fumu ile birlikte alacak \u201cmuaccel\u201d olur. <strong>E\u011fer borcun ifas\u0131 vadeye ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015fsa, alacakl\u0131 i\u00e7in zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 vadenin geldi\u011fi tarihten itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar.<\/strong> <strong>Vadeye tabi olmayan iade bor\u00e7lar\u0131nda (vedia, bir servetin idaresine ili\u015fkin vek\u00e2let gibi) bor\u00e7 akdin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte de\u011fil, bu ili\u015fkinin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten itibaren ba\u015flamaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Bu bak\u0131mdan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n da, ili\u015fkinin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi doktrinde de bask\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f olarak kabul edilmektedir. Kanun koyucu BK. 128. maddede zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131 i\u00e7in bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmesi esas\u0131ndan ayr\u0131larak, alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel olmas\u0131n\u0131 yeterli g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. BK\u2019n\u0131n 125. maddesine g\u00f6re <strong>aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, alacaklar ilke olarak on y\u0131ll\u0131k zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabidir.<\/strong> BK\u2019n\u0131n. 126. maddesinde bu ilkenin istisnas\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re baz\u0131 alacaklar be\u015f y\u0131lda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frar. <strong>Vekilin ald\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 verme borcunun konusu para ise, BK\u2019n\u0131n 393. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re, vekil zimmetinde kalan paran\u0131n faizini de verme\u011fe mecburdur<\/strong> <em>(Tando\u011fan, H.: Bor\u00e7lar Hukuku, cilt II, sh.506-508).<\/em> Vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde vekilin ald\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 m\u00fcvekkile iade etmesine ili\u015fkin olan verme borcu ve m\u00fcvekkilin bunlar\u0131 talep hakk\u0131, BK\u2019n\u0131n 126. Maddesi d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden do\u011fan t\u00fcm alacaklar gibi be\u015f y\u0131ll\u0131k zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na tabi bulunmaktad\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fmeden do\u011fan alacaklarda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihten ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. BK\u2019n\u0131n 74. maddesi gere\u011fince, borcun yerine getirilmesi bir s\u00fcreye ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015fsa, borcun do\u011fumu ile alacak muaccel olur, yine BK\u2019nun 128. maddesi gere\u011fince de zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu tarihte ba\u015flar. Bu anlamda ifa an\u0131n\u0131n gelmesine borcun muaccel olmas\u0131 denilir. Alacakl\u0131 ancak bundan sonrad\u0131r ki alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 dava edebilir, alacak i\u00e7in zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 bu andan itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar<\/strong><\/span>. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde: Dava, vek\u00e2let akdinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131ndan kaynaklanan tapu iptali ve tescil istemine ili\u015fkin olup, yukar\u0131da da ifade edildi\u011fi \u00fczere vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin en \u00f6nemli unsurlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda, vekilin hesap verme borcu gelmektedir. Vekil, yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fin hesab\u0131n\u0131 vermeye ve m\u00fcvekkili nam ve hesab\u0131na edindi\u011fi her \u015feyi iade etmeye, iade edinceye kadar da alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu \u015feyleri saklamaya mecburdur. <strong>Vekilin hesap verme borcu, vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin kurulmas\u0131yla birlikte do\u011fup, i\u015fin vekil taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ve sona ermesinde de devam etmektedir<\/strong>. Bu nedenle de <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>vekilin ald\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 geri verme borcunda zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 vek\u00e2let s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi s\u00fcrd\u00fck\u00e7e i\u015flemez. Bir ba\u015fka deyi\u015fle iade borcunda muacceliyet, vekilin hesap vermesi veya s\u00f6zle\u015fme ili\u015fkisinin bitmesi ile ba\u015flar<\/strong><\/span> <em>(Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 2011 tarihli ve 2011\/13-161 esas ve 2011\/276 karar say\u0131l\u0131)<\/em>. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Somut olayda, vekil s\u0131fat\u0131yla hareket eden daval\u0131n\u0131n hesap verme borcunu yerine getirdi\u011fine ili\u015fkin dosya aras\u0131nda herhangi bir belge de bulunmamaktad\u0131r. H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca eldeki davada zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n doldu\u011fundan bahsedilemez.<\/strong><\/span> Dava s\u00fcresinde a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup i\u015fin esas\u0131 incelenerek taraf delillerinin toplan\u0131p sonucuna uygun bir karar verilmesi gerekirken zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin doldu\u011fundan bahisle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 19.03.2019 tarihli, 2017\/1750 E., 2019\/321 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;..Dosya i\u00e7erisinde yer alan bilgi ve belgelerden; dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz tam hisse olarak davac\u0131 &#8230; ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iken, davac\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;in 23.02.2017 tarihli ve 1607 yevmiye numaral\u0131 resmi senet ile ta\u015f\u0131nmazdaki 1\/2 hissesini 31.000,00 TL bedelle daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;a sat\u0131\u015f yoluyla temlik etti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131n\u0131n vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zler neticesinde kendisine bakmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u0130zmir ili, &#8230; il\u00e7esi, &#8230; Mahallesinde bulunan 96 ada 23 parsel say\u0131l\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131n 1\/2 hissesini daval\u0131ya devretti\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n kendi ad\u0131na sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi yapt\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak bo\u015fanma a\u015famas\u0131nda olduklar\u0131 daval\u0131n\u0131n kendisini kand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve kendisine bakmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek tapu iptali ve tescil istemiyle eldeki davay\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131, eldeki davadan \u00f6nce davac\u0131 ve daval\u0131 aras\u0131nda 14.07.2021 tarihinde Bergama 2. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinde a\u00e7\u0131lan 2021\/348 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 <strong>bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131nda eldeki davada davac\u0131 &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan sunulan cevap dilek\u00e7esi ve kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7\u0131lma tarihinin 17.09.2021 oldu\u011fu, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131ndaki cevap ve kar\u015f\u0131 dava dilek\u00e7esinde davac\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;in yata\u011f\u0131nda hasta yatmakta iken daval\u0131n\u0131n kendisini tehdit ederek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n yar\u0131 hissesini kendi \u00fczerine ge\u00e7irdi\u011fini, hastal\u0131k d\u00f6nemlerinde daval\u0131dan ilgi ve alaka g\u00f6rmedi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, nitekim davac\u0131n\u0131n hileyi kendisine a\u00e7\u0131lan bo\u015fanma davas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 cevap s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi, eldeki davan\u0131n ise 1 y\u0131ll\u0131k hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra 03.10.2022 tarihinde a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong> anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r&#8230;.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD. Esas : 2024\/4519 Karar : 2024\/6363 Tarih : 25.11.2024)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cSomut olaya gelince, davac\u0131n\u0131n soru\u015fturma dosyas\u0131ndaki beyanlar\u0131 ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re vekaletin daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;a sat\u0131\u015f iradesiyle verildi\u011fi ve bu iradeye uygun olarak kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle vekilin ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 vekil edenin iradesine uygun olarak satt\u0131\u011f\u0131, ne var ki ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f bedellerinin vekil edene \u00f6dendi\u011finin ispat edilemedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerle birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde <strong>vekilin, vekil edeni zararland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinden sorumlu tutulmas\u0131 do\u011frudur.<\/strong> Bu nedenle daval\u0131 &#8230; vekilinin t\u00fcm, davac\u0131 vekilinin a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bendin kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden reddine.\u201d<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> (Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin, 2021\/ 2088 E, 2021 \/ 4358 K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cYukar\u0131daki bilgiler do\u011frultusunda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; tapuda, davac\u0131n\u0131n hissesine d\u00fc\u015fen bedel toplam\u0131 812.500 TL olup, bu bedelden 503.600 TL \u00f6deme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 bakiye 308.900 TL kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 davac\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcndedir. Vekilin hesap verme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bulundu\u011fundan, <strong>bu bedeli \u00f6dedi\u011fini ispat y\u00fck\u00fc, vekil olan daval\u0131dad\u0131r.<\/strong>\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 3.Hukuk Dairesinin 2021\/ 1739 E, 2021 \/ 11572 K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Daval\u0131 vekil, hesap verme borcu kapsam\u0131nda; davaya konu sat\u0131\u015f bedelini tahsil etmedi\u011fini s\u00f6z konusu sat\u0131\u015f senedinin aksini ispat edecek g\u00fc\u00e7te yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir delille ispat edememi\u015f olmakla<strong><u>, ilk derece mahkemesince davac\u0131ya ait hissenin dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u015firkete tapuda sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarih olan 03\/08\/2011 tarihi itibariyle ger\u00e7ek s\u00fcr\u00fcm de\u011ferinin denetime elveri\u015fli bir \u015fekilde saptanmas\u0131, daval\u0131 vekilin davac\u0131ya kar\u015f\u0131 saptanacak bu bedelle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 satma ve ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bedeli ona g\u00f6re \u00f6deme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131nda bulundu\u011funun benimsenmesi suretiyle sonucuna uygun h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi yoluna gidilmesi gerekirken<\/u><\/strong>, eksik inceleme ve yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, karar\u0131n bu sebeple bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 3. Hukuk Dairesi&#8217;nin 21\/06\/2021 tarihli, 2020\/5740 E., 2021\/6881 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><u>&#8221;Dava, vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 sebebiyle alacak istemine ili\u015fkindir.<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0Vekalet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin en \u00f6nemli unsurlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda; vekilin talimata uygun hareket etme borcu, \u00f6zen borcu ve hesap verme borcu gelmektedir. Vekalet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde vekilin hesap verme borcu vekalet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin kurulmas\u0131yla birlikte do\u011fup; i\u015fin vekil taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ve sona ermesinde de devam etmektedir. BK.nun 392.maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince vekil, talep \u00fczerine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fin hesab\u0131n\u0131 vermeye ve m\u00fcvekkili nam ve hesab\u0131na edindi\u011fi her\u015feyi iade etmeye, iade edinceye kadar da alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu \u015feyleri saklamaya zorunludur.\u00a0<strong><u>Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta da daval\u0131lar murisi davac\u0131n\u0131n talep etti\u011fi mebla\u011f\u0131 evi satt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ki\u015fiden tahsil etmi\u015f oldu\u011funa g\u00f6re bu hususta hesap verme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bulundu\u011fundan mahkemece ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f tarihindeki bedelinin tespiti ile belirlenen bu bedele h\u00fckmedilmesi gerekirken\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>bilirki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan belirlenen ancak sat\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n hangi tarihteki bedeli oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lamayan bedele h\u00fckmedilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozma nedenidir.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 13.Hukuk Dairesinin 2013\/15330 E. 2014\/16264 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><u>&#8221;Dava, vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde ise tazminat iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir. <\/u><\/strong>Davac\u0131, taraflar\u0131n karde\u015f olduklar\u0131n\u0131,\u00a0<strong><u>daval\u0131ya murislerinden kalan ve davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlarla ilgili i\u015flemleri yapabilmesi i\u00e7in vekaletname verdi\u011fini, daval\u0131n\u0131n bu vekaletnameye dayanarak Banaz \u0130l\u00e7esinde bulunan ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi<\/u><\/strong>, bir k\u0131sm\u0131 \u00fczerinde Banaz Belediyesinin kamula\u015ft\u0131rma i\u015flemi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u011f\u0131\u015f ve takas i\u015flemi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, di\u011fer bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 da ekip bi\u00e7ti\u011fini, kendisinin bu durumu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerden \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini,\u00a0<strong><u>yap\u0131lan sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131n muvazaal\u0131 oldu\u011funu, daval\u0131n\u0131n vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131,<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0maddi ve manevi olarak b\u00fcy\u00fck zarara u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek,\u00a0<strong><u>3. ki\u015fiye devredilen ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in tazminat,<\/u><\/strong> daval\u0131n\u0131n \u00fczerinde kay\u0131tl\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar i\u00e7in tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ve tescili, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde bedel talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur\u2026\u00a0<strong><u>Somut olaya gelince; davac\u0131 yaln\u0131z vekil aleyhine dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f vekilden temlik alan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131 husumet y\u00f6neltmemi\u015ftir. Dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 vekilden temlik alan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin daval\u0131 olmas\u0131 halinde vekille i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7inde bulunan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin k\u00f6t\u00fcniyeti tespit edildi\u011fi takdirde tapu iptali ve tescili talebinin kabul edilece\u011fi hususunda teredd\u00fct yoktur. Bu durumda yaln\u0131z vekil aleyhine tazminat istemiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada tazminat bedelinin hangi tarihteki de\u011fer olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti bak\u0131m\u0131ndan tapu iptali ve tescili iste\u011fi kabul edilseydi davac\u0131n\u0131n mamelekine ge\u00e7ecek miktar olacakt\u0131. \u00d6yleyse ta\u015f\u0131nmaz bedelinin tahsiline ili\u015fkin talepte ise davac\u0131n\u0131n mamelekine ge\u00e7ecek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz miktar\u0131n\u0131n dava tarihindeki rayi\u00e7 bedeli esas al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. <\/u><\/strong>Hal b\u00f6yle olunca;\u00a0<strong><u>davaya konu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n dava tarihindeki rayi\u00e7 bedelleri usul\u00fcnce belirlenerek davac\u0131n\u0131n mamelekine ge\u00e7mesi gereken ta\u015f\u0131nmaz miktar\u0131n\u0131n bedeline h\u00fckmedilmesi gerekirken,\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeyle yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin 2020\/1591 E. 2021\/2607 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201c<strong><u>Dava, vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuki nedenine dayal\u0131 tapu iptali ve tescil, olmazsa bedel iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir<\/u><\/strong>\u2026..Hal b\u00f6yle olunca,\u00a0<strong><u>daval\u0131lar &#8230; ve &#8230;\u2019in el ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde oldu\u011fu benimsenerek dava kabul edildi\u011fine g\u00f6re, an\u0131lan daval\u0131lar\u0131n terditli bedel isteminden m\u00fc\u015ftereken ve m\u00fcteselsilen sorumlu olacaklar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru ise de; daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019in dava konusu 208 parseli devralmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilmeksizin h\u00fckmedilen bedelin tamam\u0131ndan sorumlu tutulmas\u0131 do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi;\u00a0<strong><u>davac\u0131n\u0131n terditli bedel istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden dava konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n ke\u015ffen saptanan dava tarihindeki rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferleri \u00fczerinden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekirken,<\/u><\/strong> dava dilek\u00e7esinde g\u00f6sterilen de\u011fere h\u00fckmedilerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi de isabetsizdir.\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.Hukuk Dairesinin 2022\/3341 E. 2022\/6617 K. say\u0131l\u0131 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Somut olayda; davac\u0131 taraf, daval\u0131n\u0131n evlenme \u015fart\u0131 olarak kendisine ta\u015f\u0131nmaz al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fini, davac\u0131y\u0131 evlenme vaadiyle kand\u0131rarak evleneceklerine olan inan\u00e7 nedeniyle ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bedelsiz devrine ikna etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek daval\u0131 ad\u0131na olan dava konusu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn tapu kayd\u0131n\u0131n iptali ile davac\u0131 ad\u0131na tescilini, olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde bedelin davac\u0131ya iadesini talep etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131 taraf \u00e7eki\u015fme konusu ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n kendisine iade edilmek \u00fczere daval\u0131 ad\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik herhangi bir iddiada bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <strong>Evlilik vaadi ile verilen \u015feyin T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 81. maddesi gere\u011fince geri istenemeyece\u011fi, iradi i\u015flemlerde hileden s\u00f6z edilemeyece\u011fi,<\/strong> ayr\u0131ca dosya kapsam\u0131nda hile iddias\u0131n\u0131n da ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde, tapu iptal ve tescil talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde kabul\u00fc do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n ikinci kademede tazminat talebi bulundu\u011fundan, Mahkemece bu y\u00f6nde de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131larak karar verilmesi i\u00e7in h\u00fckm\u00fcn yaz\u0131l\u0131 bu gerek\u00e7elerle bozulmas\u0131na karar vermek gerekmi\u015ftir.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.7.HD.Esas: 2024\/1172Karar: 2025\/337Tarih: 16.01.2025)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Davac\u0131, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;a temlik ederken resmi senedi okudum diye imzalam\u0131\u015f ise de davac\u0131n\u0131n 2013 y\u0131l\u0131nda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 sat\u0131n al\u0131rken parmak izi ile i\u015flem yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 satmak istemedi\u011fi ve dava d\u0131\u015f\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;tan bor\u00e7 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde beyanda bulunduklar\u0131, ilk el &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n kay\u0131nbiraderi oldu\u011fu, &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 temlik etti\u011fi&#8230;&#8217;n\u0131n ise ayn\u0131 k\u00f6yden oldu\u011fu, daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n da davac\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 &#8230; ile birlikte \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n bedel \u00f6dedi\u011fine ili\u015fkin beyan\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde <strong>davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin hile ile fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, sonraki temliklerdeki al\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131n da 1951\/1 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 1023. maddesinin korumas\u0131ndan faydalanamayacaklar\u0131<\/strong>, hal b\u00f6yle olunca davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(1.HD Dairenin 10.01.2023 tarihli ve 2022\/619 Esas)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz isteminde bulunulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine Dairemizin 19.02.2024 tarihli ve 2023\/841 Esas, 2024\/1304 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; dava konusu <strong>ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n bedelinin hemen \u00f6denece\u011fi telkini ile<\/strong> davac\u0131da sat\u0131\u015f bedelinin \u00f6denece\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131 uyand\u0131r\u0131larak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz pay\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin naklinin sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin hileye u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu iddian\u0131n davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131yla ispatland\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabit olmakla, hi\u00e7 kimsenin ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 bedelsiz ya da de\u011ferinin \u00e7ok alt\u0131nda satmas\u0131n\u0131n da beklenemeyece\u011fi, zira semenin sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n asli unsurlar\u0131ndan birisi oldu\u011fu, semen \u00f6denece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi uyand\u0131r\u0131larak ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin naklinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ve ondan sonra semenin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 durumunda temlikin hile ile ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finin kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn gerekti\u011fi, hal b\u00f6yle olunca, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken; delillerin takdirinde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek davan\u0131n reddi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisinin isabetsiz oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD. Esas : 2024\/144 Karar : 2025\/443 Tarih : 06.02.2025)<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi, inananla inan\u0131lan aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan, onlar\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 belirleyen, inan\u00e7l\u0131 muamelenin sona erme sebeplerini ve devredilen hakk\u0131n, inan\u0131lan taraf\u0131ndan inanana geri verme (iade) \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren bor\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir muameledir. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme, taraflar\u0131n\u0131n hak ve bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kapsayan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir akit olup, alacak ve m\u00fclkiyetin naklinin hukuki sebebini te\u015fkil eder. Taraflar b\u00f6yle bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 i\u015flemle genellikle, teminat te\u015fkil etmek ve iade edilmek \u00fczere, mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na dahil bir \u015fey veya hakk\u0131, ayn\u0131 amac\u0131 g\u00fcden ola\u011fan hukuki muamelelerden daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir hukuki durum yaratarak inan\u0131lana inan\u00e7l\u0131 olarak kazand\u0131rmak i\u00e7in ba\u015fvururlar. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, bu i\u015flemle bor\u00e7lu, alacakl\u0131s\u0131na mal\u0131n\u0131 rehin edecek, yani yaln\u0131zca s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 ayni bir hak tan\u0131yacak yerde, mal\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetini ge\u00e7irerek rehin hakk\u0131ndan daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc, daha ileri giden bir hak tan\u0131r. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 temlikin de\u011finilen bu \u00f6zellikleri nedeniyle, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile satan kimsenin art\u0131k sadece \u00f6d\u00fcn\u00e7 alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu paray\u0131 geri vererek ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131 kendisine temlik edilmesini istemek yolunda bir alacak hakk\u0131; ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile alan kimsenin de borcun \u00f6denmesi g\u00fcn\u00fcne kadar ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131 ba\u015fkas\u0131na satmamak ve bor\u00e7 \u00f6denince de geri vermek yolunda yaln\u0131zca bir borcu kalm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Uygulamada mesele, 05.02.1947 tarih, 20\/6 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 ile ili\u015fkilendirilip, bu karar dayanak yap\u0131lmak suretiyle \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme gidilmektedir. S\u00f6z konusu kararda; eski hukuka g\u00f6re m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ve ge\u00e7erli olan muvazaa ve nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear iddialar\u0131n\u0131n, Medeni Kanun&#8217;un y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden sonra ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mallar hakk\u0131nda dinlenip dinlenemeyece\u011fi tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve sonu\u00e7ta, nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear davalar\u0131n\u0131n dinlenebilir ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 delil ile ispat\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funa h\u00fckmolunmu\u015ftur. \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n konular\u0131yla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131, sonu\u00e7lar\u0131yla ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bulundu\u011fu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. Nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear i\u00e7in d\u00fczenleme getiren 1947 tarihli karar\u0131n, teminat amac\u0131yla temlike dair inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 da ku\u015fkusuzdur. Uygulamada, an\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler gerek \u00f6z\u00fc, gerek i\u015fleyi\u015fi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan genelde muvazaa, \u00f6zelde ise nam-\u0131 m\u00fcstear ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda nitelendirile gelmektedir. Belirtilen \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda da de\u011finildi\u011fi \u00fczere; inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri bir yandan m\u00fclkiyeti nakil borcu do\u011furmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan taraflar\u0131 ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131, di\u011fer yandan m\u00fclkiyetin naklinin sebebini te\u015fkil etmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan tasarruf i\u015flemlerini b\u00fcnyesinde bar\u0131nd\u0131ran s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerdir. Bu durumda ko\u015fullar\u0131n olu\u015fmas\u0131 halinde ta\u015f\u0131nmaz m\u00fclkiyetini nakil \u00f6zelli\u011fini ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir. \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n sonu\u00e7 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde ifade olundu\u011fu \u00fczere, inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015fleme dayal\u0131 olup dinlenilirli\u011fi kabul edilen iddialar\u0131n ispat\u0131, \u015fekle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan yaz\u0131l\u0131 delildir. <strong>\u0130nan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan bu belgenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye taraf olanlar\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7ermesi gereklidir.<\/strong> Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir kabul, hem \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi, hem de ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n tapu d\u0131\u015f\u0131 sat\u0131\u015flar\u0131na olanak sa\u011flamak anlam\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yaca\u011f\u0131ndan kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc bu s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerle ba\u011fda\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lamaz. \u0130nan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flem inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, s\u00f6zle\u015fmelere ili\u015fkin zaman a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemlere de uygulanaca\u011f\u0131, bu s\u00fcrenin inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemin t\u00fcr\u00fcne g\u00f6re k\u0131yasen tatbik edilecek vekalet ve rehin h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re belirlenece\u011fi gerek uygulamada gerekse doktrinde bask\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f olarak benimsenmektedir. Ne var ki, zaman a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flamas\u0131 i\u00e7in inan\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi sona ermeli veya alacak muaccel hale gelmelidir. Bu itibarla inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi sona ermedi\u011fi, inan\u00e7 konusu inan\u0131landa, al\u0131nan para inananda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece zaman a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flamas\u0131na olanak yoktur. A\u00e7\u0131klanan kural\u0131n do\u011fal sonucu olarak taraflar borcun \u00f6denmesi i\u00e7in bir s\u00fcre kararla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015f ve bor\u00e7 bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde \u00f6denmemi\u015f olsa dahi inan\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi devam etti\u011finden inan\u00e7 konusunun iadesi i\u00e7in dava a\u00e7\u0131labilir. \u0130nan\u0131lan, kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7ti\u011finden bahisle inan\u00e7 konusunu iade etme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn sona erdi\u011fini savunarak iade borcunu yerine getirmemezlik yapamaz. Keza kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde borcun \u00f6denmemesi halinde inan\u00e7 konusunun inan\u0131lana ge\u00e7ece\u011fi, inanan\u0131n dava a\u00e7amayaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde inanan\u0131n m\u00fczayakas\u0131ndan yararlan\u0131larak s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye konulan b\u00f6yle bir ko\u015ful TMK\u2019n\u0131n 873. ve 863. maddelerinin buyurucu h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 d\u00fc\u015fece\u011finden ge\u00e7ersiz olup s\u00f6zle\u015fme serbestisi kural\u0131na dayan\u0131lamaz. Aksinin kabul\u00fc halinde bor\u00e7 veren bor\u00e7 alan\u0131n darda kalmas\u0131ndan yararlanarak daima inan\u00e7 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine b\u00f6yle bir h\u00fck\u00fcm koymak suretiyle s\u00f6z konusu madde h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinden kurtulma ve bor\u00e7 verdi\u011fi ki\u015finin mal\u0131n\u0131 veya hakk\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok az bir bedel ile eline ge\u00e7irme, onu istismar etme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 elde etmi\u015f olur ki, bu husus s\u00f6zle\u015fme hukukunun genel prensiplerine, ahlaka, kanun koyucunun amac\u0131na ters bir sonu\u00e7 do\u011furur ve tefecili\u011fi te\u015fvik eder. Nitekim b\u00f6yle s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin bat\u0131l oldu\u011fu TBK\u2019n\u0131n 26. ve 27. (BK\u2019nin 19. ve 20.) maddelerinde h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Di\u011fer taraftan, bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere hukukumuzda, di\u011fer \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde oldu\u011fu gibi <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>ki\u015filerin huzur ve g\u00fcven i\u00e7erisinde al\u0131\u015f veri\u015fte bulunmalar\u0131 sat\u0131n ald\u0131klar\u0131 \u015feylerin ilerde kendilerinden al\u0131nabilece\u011fi endi\u015felerini ta\u015f\u0131mamalar\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flamak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle, alan ki\u015finin iyi niyetinin korunmas\u0131 ilkesi kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/strong><\/span> Bu ama\u00e7la 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) 2. maddesinin genel h\u00fckm\u00fc yan\u0131nda menkul mallarda 988. ve 98., tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesinde ise 1023. maddelerinin \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmleri getirilmi\u015ftir. <strong>Bir devleti olu\u015fturan unsurlardan biri insan unsuru ise bunun kadar \u00f6nemli olan \u00f6tekisi toprakt\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu nedenle Devlet, n\u00fcfus sicilleri gibi tapu sicillerinin de tutulmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmi\u015f, bunlar\u0131n alenili\u011fini (herkese a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131n\u0131) sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f, iyi ve do\u011fru tutulmamas\u0131ndan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011fu kabul etmi\u015f<\/strong>, de\u011finilen t\u00fcm bu sebeplerin do\u011fal sonucu olarak da <strong>tapuya itimat edip ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal edinen ki\u015finin iyi niyetini korumak zorunlulu\u011funu duymu\u015ftur. Belirtilen ilke TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 1023. maddesinde aynen &#8220;tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki sicile iyi niyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya ba\u015fka bir ayni hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur<\/strong>&#8221; \u015feklinde yer alm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 ilke tamamlay\u0131c\u0131 madde niteli\u011findeki 1024. maddenin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re &#8220;Bir ayni hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f ise bunu bilen veya bilmesi gereken \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi bu tescile dayanamaz&#8221; bi\u00e7iminde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ne var ki; tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n intikallerinde huzur ve g\u00fcveni koruma, toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flama u\u011fruna, tapu kayd\u0131nda ismi ge\u00e7meyen ama as\u0131l malik olan\u0131n hakk\u0131 feda edildi\u011finden, iktisapta bulunan ki\u015finin iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak tespiti b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten bir yanda <strong>tapu sicilinin do\u011frulu\u011funa inanarak<\/strong> iktisapta bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren kimse, di\u011fer yanda ise kendisi i\u00e7in maddi, hatta baz\u0131 hallerde manevi b\u00fcy\u00fck de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131yan ayni hakk\u0131n\u0131 yitirme tehlikesi ile kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalan \u00f6nceki malik bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle,<strong> y\u00fczeysel ve \u015fekilci bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck ma\u011fduriyetlere yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131, ki\u015filerin Devlete ve adalete olan g\u00fcven ve sayg\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sarsaca\u011f\u0131 ve yasa koyucunun amac\u0131n\u0131n ilk bak\u0131\u015fta, \u015feklen iyi niyetli g\u00f6z\u00fckeni de\u011fil ger\u00e7ekten iyiniyetli olan ki\u015fiyi korumak oldu\u011fu hususlar\u0131n\u0131n daima g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131, bu y\u00f6nde t\u00fcm delillerin toplan\u0131p derinli\u011fine irdelenmesi ve de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/strong> Nitekim bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften hareketle, <strong>&#8220;k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n def&#8217;i de\u011fil itiraz oldu\u011fu,<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>iddia ve m\u00fcdafaan\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131na tabii olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her zaman ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fi ve mahkemece kendili\u011finden (resen) nazara al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131\u201d<\/strong><\/span> ilkeleri 08.11.1991 tarih l990\/4 Esas l99l\/3 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda kabul edilmi\u015f, bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler de ayn\u0131 do\u011frultuda geli\u015fmi\u015ftir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD Esas : 2023\/3833 Karar : 2024\/5105 Tarih : 23.09.2024)<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun temsil ve vekalet aktini d\u00fczenleyen h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re, vekalet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcvenine dayan\u0131r. Vekilin bor\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7o\u011fu bu g\u00fcven unsurundan, onun vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun davran\u0131\u015f y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden do\u011far. 6098 s. &#8230; Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda (TBK) sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vekil edene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve 506. maddesinde (818 s. Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 390.) aynen; &#8220;Vekil, vek\u00e2let borcunu bizzat ifa etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ancak vekile yetki verildi\u011fi veya durumun zorunlu ya da team\u00fcl\u00fcn m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde vekil, i\u015fi ba\u015fkas\u0131na yapt\u0131rabilir. Vekil \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vek\u00e2let verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini \u00f6zeterek, sadakat ve \u00f6zenle y\u00fcr\u00fctmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Vek\u00e2letin kapsam\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015fse, g\u00f6r\u00fclecek i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenir. (TBK&#8217;nin 504\/1) S\u00f6zle\u015fmede vekaletin nas\u0131l yerine getirilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmasa veya yap\u0131lan i\u015flem d\u0131\u015f temsil yetkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde kalsa dahi vekilin bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc daima mevcuttur. Hatta malik taraf\u0131ndan vekilin bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n sat\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, diledi\u011fi bedelle diledi\u011fi kimseye sat\u0131\u015f yapabilece\u011fi \u015feklinde yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nmas\u0131, sataca\u011f\u0131 kimseyi dahi belirtmesi, ona d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131, sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcunu g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmek suretiyle, makul say\u0131lacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcler d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karak sat\u0131\u015f yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131 vermez. Vekil edenin yarar\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak bir eylem veya i\u015flem yapan vekil de\u011finilen maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca sorumlu olur. Bu sorumluluk BK&#8217;de daha hafif olan i\u015f\u00e7inin sorumlulu\u011funa k\u0131yasen belirlenirken, TBK&#8217;de benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin sorumlulu\u011fu esas al\u0131narak daha da a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi 4721 s. &#8230; Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani <strong>vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya<\/strong> <strong>kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar.<\/strong> <strong>Vekil vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vekalet eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz.<\/strong> Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olup vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 <strong>d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n<\/strong> do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir. S\u00f6z konusu Yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan <strong>hakim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur<\/strong>. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fc niyeti te\u015fvik etmek en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD. Esas : 2021\/6964 Karar : 2023\/648 Tarih : 08.02.2023)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dairenin 21\/04\/2014 tarihli 2013\/20532 Esas 2014\/8181 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; \u201c&#8230;Yemin, son \u00e7are olarak ba\u015fvurulan bir delildir. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, yemin deliline ba\u015fvurabilmek i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle yemin \u00f6nerisinde bulunan\u0131n ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc di\u011fer delillerin incelenmesi ve bunlar\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu nedenle, t\u00fcm deliller toplan\u0131p de\u011ferlendirilmeden mahkemece davac\u0131ya yemin teklif edilmesine bir sonu\u00e7 ba\u011flanamaz. \u00d6zellikle, daval\u0131n\u0131n, san\u0131k olarak yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00c7orum 1. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 2012\/77 Esas\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 derdest olan ceza davas\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, her ne kadar BK&#8217;nin 53. (TBK. 74.) maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca kural olarak ceza mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan verilen beraat karar\u0131 hukuk hakimini ba\u011flamaz ise de, orada belirlenen veya belirlenecek olgular\u0131n eldeki dava bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 bir belge ibraz edilememi\u015fse de, ceza dosyas\u0131nda sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclen baz\u0131 olgular\u0131n (6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;nin 202.) HUMK&#8217;nun 292. maddesi gere\u011fince delil ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca; <strong>ceza davas\u0131n\u0131n sonucunun beklenmesi,<\/strong> ceza dosyas\u0131ndaki ve eldeki dosyadaki delillerin birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken eksik soru\u015fturma ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu \u00fczere h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir.\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle III. Paragrafta yer alan karar bozulmu\u015f; Dairenin 12\/02\/2015 tarihli 2014\/16572 Esas 2015\/1994 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla, daval\u0131 vekilinin karar d\u00fczeltme isteminin reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD Esas: 2021\/7845Karar: 2022\/5013Tarih: 21.06.2022)<\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"yj6qo\"><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201d\u00d6te yandan,<strong> vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi 4721 s. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar. Vekil vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vekalet eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz. Ne var ki, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015fbirli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli olup vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, TMK&#8217;nin 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong> S\u00f6z konusu yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan hakim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (resen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fc niyeti te\u015fvik etmek en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u201d<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin; 2019\/4508 E, 2020\/6780 K)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Kabule g\u00f6re de; <strong>vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuksal nedenine dayal\u0131 tazminat istekleri herhangi bir hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc ve zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresine tabi olmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen,<\/strong> tazminat iste\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle ret karar\u0131 verilmesi de hatal\u0131d\u0131r\u201d <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin; 2021\/6752 E, 2021\/5259 K)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nda (TBK) sadakat ve \u00f6zen borcu, vekilin vekil edene kar\u015f\u0131 en \u00f6nde gelen borcu kabul edilmi\u015f ve 506. maddesinde aynen; &#8220;Vekil, vekalet borcunu bizzat ifa etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Ancak vekile yetki verildi\u011fi veya durumun zorunlu ya da team\u00fcl\u00fcn m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde vekil, i\u015fi ba\u015fkas\u0131na yapt\u0131rabilir. Vekil \u00fcstlendi\u011fi i\u015f ve hizmetleri, vekalet verenin hakl\u0131 menfaatlerini g\u00f6zeterek, sadakat ve \u00f6zenle y\u00fcr\u00fctmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Vekilin \u00f6zen borcundan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011funun belirlenmesinde, benzer alanda i\u015f ve hizmetleri \u00fcstlenen basiretli bir vekilin g\u00f6stermesi gereken davran\u0131\u015f esas al\u0131n\u0131r.&#8221; h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla vekil, vekil edenin yarar\u0131na ve iradesine uygun hareket etme, onu zararland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flardan ka\u00e7\u0131nma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc alt\u0131ndad\u0131r. Hemen belirtilmelidir ki; \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere, taraflar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131na, dayand\u0131klar\u0131 belgelere, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa uygulanmas\u0131 gereken hukuk kurallar\u0131 ile hukuki ili\u015fkinin nitelendirilmesine, dava \u015fartlar\u0131na, yarg\u0131lama ve ispat kurallar\u0131na g\u00f6re vekil olan daval\u0131 &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan vekalet g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakta olup \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin bu husustaki kabul\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan da istinaf yoluna ba\u015fvurulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ne var ki; Mahkemece, daval\u0131 vekil &#8230; d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki daval\u0131lar\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131 edinimlerinin iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131, ba\u015fka bir ifade ile 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun (TMK) 1023. maddesinin koruyuculu\u011fundan yararlan\u0131p yararlanamayacaklar\u0131 hususunda yap\u0131lan ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve incelemenin h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmaya yeterli oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemez. Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere, <strong>vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015fi TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 3. maddesi anlam\u0131nda iyi niyetli ise yani vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmiyor veya kendisinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen bilmesine olanak yoksa, vekil ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme ge\u00e7erlidir ve vekil edeni ba\u011flar. Vekil vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullansa dahi bu husus vekil ile vekalet eden aras\u0131nda bir i\u00e7 sorun olarak kal\u0131r, vekil ile s\u00f6zle\u015fme yapan ki\u015finin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklara etkili olamaz. Ancak, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi vekil ile \u00e7\u0131kar ve i\u015f birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ise veya k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli olup vekilin vekalet g\u00f6revini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 biliyor veya bilmesi gerekiyorsa vekil edenin s\u00f6zle\u015fme ile ba\u011fl\u0131 say\u0131lmamas\u0131, TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 2. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal bir sonucu olarak kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong> S\u00f6z konusu Yasa maddesi buyurucu nitelik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan hakim taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden (re&#8217;sen) g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 zorunludur. Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce k\u00f6t\u00fcniyeti te\u015fvik etmek, en az\u0131ndan ona g\u00f6z yummak olur. Oysa b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet korunmam\u0131\u015f daima mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Nitekim uygulama ve bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bu y\u00f6nde geli\u015fmi\u015f ve kararl\u0131l\u0131k kazanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hukukumuzda, di\u011fer \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde oldu\u011fu gibi ki\u015filerin huzur ve g\u00fcven i\u00e7erisinde al\u0131\u015f veri\u015fte bulunmalar\u0131, sat\u0131n ald\u0131klar\u0131 \u015feylerin ileride kendilerinden al\u0131nabilece\u011fi endi\u015felerini ta\u015f\u0131mamalar\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flamak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle, sat\u0131n alan ki\u015finin iyi niyetinin korunmas\u0131 ilkesi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu kapsamda TMK\u2019n\u0131n 3. maddesinin genel h\u00fckm\u00fc yan\u0131nda menkul mallarda 988 ve 989, tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesinde ise 1023. maddelerinin \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmleri getirilmi\u015ftir. Yolsuz tescilin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer bak\u0131m\u0131ndan do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve \u201c\u0130yiniyetli \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1023. maddesinde; \u201cTapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki tescile iyiniyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. An\u0131lan bu maddeye g\u00f6re, <strong>tapu sicilinde ismi ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin ger\u00e7ek hak sahibi oldu\u011funa inanan veya kendisinden beklenen t\u00fcm \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen ger\u00e7ek malik olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tapu sicilinde yolsuzluk bulundu\u011funu bilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmayan ki\u015finin iktisab\u0131 korunur.<\/strong> \u00d6te yandan, ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un \u201c\u0130yiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1024. maddesi ise; <strong>\u201cBir ayn\u00ee hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f ise bunu bilen veya bilmesi gereken \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi bu tescile dayanamaz.<\/strong> TMK\u2019n\u0131n 1023. maddesi iyi niyetle m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 korurken; tamamlay\u0131c\u0131 madde niteli\u011finde bulunan 1024. madde ile de iyi niyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131slar\u0131n kazan\u0131m\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00fczere, tapuda ta\u015f\u0131nmazla ilgili kay\u0131tlara ili\u015fkin olarak<strong> \u201ctapu siciline g\u00fcven ilkesi\u201d benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/strong> Ne var ki; tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n intikallerinde huzur ve g\u00fcveni koruma, toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flama u\u011fruna, tapu kayd\u0131nda ismi ge\u00e7meyen ama as\u0131l malik olan\u0131n hakk\u0131 feda edildi\u011finden iktisapta bulunan ki\u015finin iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak tespiti b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten bir yanda tapu sicilinin do\u011frulu\u011funa inanarak iktisapta bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren kimse, di\u011fer yanda ise kendisi i\u00e7in maddi, hatta baz\u0131 h\u00e2llerde manevi b\u00fcy\u00fck de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131yan ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131n\u0131 yitirme tehlikesi ile kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalan \u00f6nceki malik bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle, <strong>y\u00fczeysel ve \u015fekilci bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck ma\u011fduriyetlere yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131, ki\u015filerin Devlete ve adalete olan g\u00fcven ve sayg\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sarsaca\u011f\u0131<\/strong> ve yasa koyucunun amac\u0131n\u0131n ilk bak\u0131\u015fta \u015feklen iyi niyetli g\u00f6z\u00fckeni de\u011fil, ger\u00e7ekten iyi niyetli olan ki\u015fiyi korumak oldu\u011fu hususlar\u0131n\u0131n daima g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131, bu y\u00f6nde t\u00fcm delillerin toplan\u0131p derinli\u011fine irdelenmesi ve de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Belirtmek gerekir ki, durumun \u00f6zelliklerine g\u00f6re <strong>kendinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermeyen kimse iyiniyet iddias\u0131nda bulunamaz.<\/strong> <strong>Bir ki\u015finin kendinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6sterip g\u00f6stermedi\u011fi ise normal bir insan\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde sergiledi\u011fi davran\u0131\u015f bi\u00e7imi dikkate al\u0131narak belirlenir.<\/strong> Ger\u00e7ekten de kanun koyucunun iyi niyeti koruyarak ger\u00e7ek hak sahibinin hakk\u0131n\u0131 feda etti\u011fi bu h\u00e2lde iyi niyetin objektif olarak mevcut olmas\u0131 gerekir. Buna g\u00f6re, <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>makul bir insan\u0131n g\u00f6sterece\u011fi \u00f6zenle herkes\u00e7e bilinebilecek bir ger\u00e7e\u011fi g\u00f6rmeyen ve tedbirli bir insan\u0131n \u015f\u00fcphelenebilece\u011fi bir durumu dikkate almayarak ihmalk\u00e2r davranan ki\u015fi iyi niyetli say\u0131lamaz.<\/strong> <\/span>Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131nda de\u011finilip benimsendi\u011fi \u00fczere, <strong>ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00e7ok k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde ve olduk\u00e7a d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck bir bedelle el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesi i\u015flemlerinin ku\u015fkulu hareket olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve daval\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden \u015f\u00fcphe do\u011furan bir durum olarak ele al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/strong> Belirtmek gerekir ki, tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki kay\u0131tlar\u0131n yolsuz oldu\u011funa dair gerek\u00e7esiz soyut bir iddia iyi niyet karinesini ortadan kald\u0131rmaz ise de iyi niyet karinesine dayanan ve <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>durumdan \u015f\u00fcphelenen ki\u015finin de ku\u015fkuya yer vermeyecek \u015fekilde ciddi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmadan \u00f6zen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc yerine getirdi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/strong><\/span> \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc, g\u00fcven ilkesinden sadece iyi niyetli oldu\u011fu kesin olan ki\u015filer yararlanabilir (Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 24.05.2022 tarihli ve 2019\/1-425 Esas, 2022\/729 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131) Di\u011fer taraftan; 14.02.1951 tarihli ve 1949\/17 Esas, 1951\/1 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda, vak\u0131a ve karinelerden olayda kanunen iyi niyet iddias\u0131nda bulunamayaca\u011f\u0131 belirlenmi\u015f olan kimsenin k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetinin di\u011fer tarafa ispat ettirilmesine art\u0131k sebep ve vecih kalmayaca\u011f\u0131 ve dava hakk\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fumunu sa\u011flayan veya bertaraf eden iyi niyetin ve k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetin bu durumda mahkemece re&#8217;sen nazara al\u0131nabilece\u011fi karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hal b\u00f6yle olunca; \u00f6ncelikle, dava konusu 3 nolu ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm bak\u0131m\u0131ndan resmi sat\u0131\u015f senetleri ile tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fc aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fkinin teredd\u00fcte yer b\u0131rakmayacak \u015fekilde giderilmesi, daha sonra daval\u0131lar &#8230;, &#8230;, &#8230; ve &#8230;&#8217;un iyi niyetli olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n, bir ba\u015fka deyi\u015fle TMK&#8217;n\u0131n 1023. maddesinin koruyuculu\u011fundan yararlan\u0131p yararlanamayacaklar\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131, taraflar\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcm delillerin eksiksiz toplanmas\u0131, toplanan ve toplanacak t\u00fcm deliller ile birlikte yukar\u0131da belirtilen ilkeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirilme yap\u0131larak sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken, eksik ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi do\u011fru de\u011fildir. Kabule g\u00f6re de; muris &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n veraset ilam\u0131ndaki paylar\u0131 esas al\u0131nmak suretiyle, h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nan tazminat miktar\u0131ndan hangi davac\u0131ya ne miktarda verilece\u011finin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmesi gerekirken 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 297\/2. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacak \u015fekilde infazda teredd\u00fct yaratacak bi\u00e7imde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi de do\u011fru de\u011fildir. &#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay .HD.2023\/6530 E.2025\/1778 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>&#8221;Tapu sicili, 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 7. maddesi uyar\u0131nca i\u00e7eri\u011finin do\u011frulu\u011fu karine olarak kabul edilen bir resm\u00ee sicildir.<\/strong> Devlet, n\u00fcfus sicilleri gibi tapu sicillerinin de tutulmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenmi\u015f, bunlar\u0131n alenili\u011fini (herkese a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131n\u0131) sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f, iyi ve do\u011fru tutulmamas\u0131ndan do\u011fan sorumlulu\u011fu kabul etmi\u015f, de\u011finilen t\u00fcm bu sebeplerin do\u011fal sonucu olarak da tapuya itimat edip, ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal edinen ki\u015finin iyiniyetini korumak zorunlulu\u011funu duymu\u015ftur. Hukukumuzda, di\u011fer \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk sistemlerinde oldu\u011fu gibi ki\u015filerin huzur ve g\u00fcven i\u00e7erisinde al\u0131\u015f veri\u015fte bulunmalar\u0131, <strong>sat\u0131n ald\u0131klar\u0131 \u015feylerin ileride kendilerinden al\u0131nabilece\u011fi endi\u015felerini ta\u015f\u0131mamalar\u0131,<\/strong> dolay\u0131s\u0131yla toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flamak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle, sat\u0131n alan ki\u015finin iyiniyetinin korunmas\u0131 ilkesi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu kapsamda 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 3. maddesinin genel h\u00fckm\u00fc yan\u0131nda menkul mallarda 988 ve 989, tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesinde ise 1023. maddesinin \u00f6zel h\u00fck\u00fcmleri getirilmi\u015ftir. Yolsuz tescilin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer bak\u0131m\u0131ndan do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve \u201c\u0130yiniyetli \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1023. maddesinde; \u201c<strong>Tapu k\u00fct\u00fc\u011f\u00fcndeki tescile iyiniyetle dayanarak m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131 korunur\u201d<\/strong> h\u00fckm\u00fc \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. An\u0131lan bu maddeye g\u00f6re, <strong>tapu sicilinde ismi ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin ger\u00e7ek hak sahibi oldu\u011funa inanan veya kendisinden beklenen t\u00fcm \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermesine ra\u011fmen ger\u00e7ek malik olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tapu sicilinde yolsuzluk bulundu\u011funu bilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmayan ki\u015finin iktisab\u0131 korunur.<\/strong> \u00d6te yandan ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un \u201c\u0130yiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 1024. maddesi ise; <strong>\u201cBir ayn\u00ee hak yolsuz olarak tescil edilmi\u015f ise, bunu bilen veya bilmesi gereken \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi bu tescile dayanamaz.<\/strong> Ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 olmayan bir hukuk\u00ee i\u015fleme dayanan veya hukuk\u00ee sebepten yoksun bulunan tescil yolsuzdur. B\u00f6yle bir tescil y\u00fcz\u00fcnden ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131 zedelenen kimse, tescilin yolsuz oldu\u011funu iyiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc<br \/>\nki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131 do\u011frudan do\u011fruya ileri s\u00fcrebilir\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermekte olup, bu madde ile de iyiniyetli olmayan kimsenin iktisab\u0131n\u0131n korunmayaca\u011f\u0131na vurgu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 1023. maddesi iyiniyetle m\u00fclkiyet veya bir ba\u015fka ayn\u00ee hak kazanan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin bu kazan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 korurken; tamamlay\u0131c\u0131 madde niteli\u011finde bulunan 1024. madde ile de iyiniyetli olmayan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fah\u0131slar\u0131n kazan\u0131m\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fcz say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00fczere, tapuda ta\u015f\u0131nmazla ilgili kay\u0131tlara ili\u015fkin olarak <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>tapu siciline g\u00fcven ilkesi benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/strong><\/span> Ne var ki; tapulu ta\u015f\u0131nmazlar\u0131n intikallerinde, huzur ve g\u00fcveni koruma, toplum d\u00fczenini sa\u011flama u\u011fruna, tapu kayd\u0131nda ismi ge\u00e7meyen ama as\u0131l malik olan\u0131n hakk\u0131 feda edildi\u011finden iktisapta bulunan ki\u015finin, iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak tespiti b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten bir yanda tapu sicilinin do\u011frulu\u011funa inanarak iktisapta bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren kimse di\u011fer yanda ise kendisi i\u00e7in maddi, hatta baz\u0131 h\u00e2llerde manevi b\u00fcy\u00fck de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131yan ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131n\u0131 yitirme tehlikesi ile kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalan \u00f6nceki malik bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle, y\u00fczeysel ve \u015fekilci bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck ma\u011fduriyetlere yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131, ki\u015filerin<strong> Devlete ve adalete olan g\u00fcven ve sayg\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 sarsaca\u011f\u0131<\/strong> ve yasa koyucunun amac\u0131n\u0131n ilk bak\u0131\u015fta, \u015feklen iyiniyetli g\u00f6z\u00fckeni de\u011fil, ger\u00e7ekten iyiniyetli olan ki\u015fiyi korumak oldu\u011fu hususlar\u0131n\u0131n daima g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131, bu y\u00f6nde t\u00fcm delillerin toplan\u0131p derinli\u011fine irdelenmesi ve de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Tapu siciline g\u00fcven ilkesi, ger\u00e7ek hak sahipli\u011fine dayanmayan bir tescile (yolsuz tescile) dayan\u0131larak iyiniyetle kazan\u0131lan ayn\u00ee hakk\u0131n ge\u00e7erli olarak h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini do\u011furmas\u0131 demektir. \u0130yiniyet hakk\u0131n do\u011fumunda temel unsurlardan biri oldu\u011fundan tapu siciline inanarak iktisapta bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren ki\u015fi aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda iyiniyet veya k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet olgusunun ispat\u0131 b\u00fcy\u00fck bir \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Genel h\u00fck\u00fcm niteli\u011findeki 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca kanunun iyiniyete hukuki bir sonu\u00e7 ba\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlarda, as\u0131l olan iyiniyetin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturan 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 1023. maddesi de bu genel h\u00fck\u00fcmde bahsi ge\u00e7en; kanunun, iyiniyete hukuki sonu\u00e7 ba\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlardan biridir. Dolays\u0131yla iyiniyetin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanun taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen bir karine oldu\u011fundan, tapu siciline g\u00fcvenerek iyiniyetle hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunan ki\u015fi aleyhine a\u00e7\u0131lan bu t\u00fcr davalarda, daval\u0131n\u0131n iyiniyetli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden davac\u0131n\u0131n bunu ispat etmesi gerekmektedir. \u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren tarafa ait olmakla birlikte k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n hukuki niteli\u011fi uyar\u0131nca ispat edilmesi \u00e7o\u011fu zaman zordur. Bu nedenle uygulamada \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcren davac\u0131n\u0131n baz\u0131 fiili karinelerden yararlanabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131nda ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n \u00e7ok s\u0131k aral\u0131klarla el de\u011fi\u015ftirmesi ya da rayi\u00e7 de\u011ferinin \u00e7ok alt\u0131ndaki bir fiyatla sat\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 gibi durumlar, fiili birer karine olarak kabul edilmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca bu konu hakk\u0131nda, 14.02.1951 tarihli ve 1949\/17 E., 1951\/1 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda; \u201c&#8230;Vak\u0131a ve karinelerden olayda kanunen iyi niyet iddias\u0131nda bulunmayacak durumu belirmi\u015f olan kimsenin k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetinin di\u011fer tarafa ispat ettirilmesine sebep ve vecih kalmayaca\u011f\u0131ndan dava hakk\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fumunu sa\u011flayan ve bertaraf eden iyi veya k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetin bu durumda mahkemece re\u2019sen nazara al\u0131nabilece\u011fine&#8230;\u201d, 08.11.1991 tarihli ve 1990\/4 Esas, 1991\/3 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda ise; \u201c&#8230;Tapuda kay\u0131tl\u0131 bulunan bir ta\u015f\u0131nmaz mal\u0131 iktisap eden kimseye kar\u015f\u0131 TMK.nun 931. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen iyi niyet kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan tapu iptali davalar\u0131nda, dava a\u00e7ma iradesinin iktisab\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fc niyete dayal\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131 da ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131na, kald\u0131 ki \u00f6yle olmasa bile buradaki <strong>k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n hukuk\u00ee mahiyeti itibariyle itiraz niteli\u011finde bulundu\u011fu ve bu nedenle de yarg\u0131lama sona erinceye kadar iddia ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131na tabi olmadan her zaman ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fine&#8230;\u201d karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/strong> 14.02.1951 tarihli ve 1949\/17 Esas, 1951\/1 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 ile kabul edilen k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n mahkemece kendili\u011finden (resen) nazara al\u0131nabilece\u011fi ilkesi 08.11.1991 tarihli ve 1990\/4 E., 1991\/3 K. say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda da benimsenerek; <strong>k\u00f6t\u00fcniyet iddias\u0131n\u0131n def&#8217;i de\u011fil itiraz oldu\u011fu, iddia ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131na tabii olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her zaman ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fi<\/strong> ve <strong>mahkemece resen nazara al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131<\/strong> kabul edilmi\u015f, bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler de ayn\u0131 do\u011frultuda geli\u015fmi\u015ftir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u015fahs\u0131n iyiniyetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fcniyete dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n hangi h\u00e2llerde bilinmesi gerekti\u011fi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131rken kesin bir \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fc koymak m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fil ise de, genel baz\u0131 kriterlerle \u00f6nemli \u00f6zel durumlar\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Genel kriter olarak, daval\u0131n\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tescilin k\u00f6t\u00fcniyetli oldu\u011funu ve taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n genel hayat tecr\u00fcbelerine ve hayat\u0131n do\u011fal ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6re bilip bilmedi\u011fi veya normal g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fl\u00fc bir insan\u0131n sarf etmesi gereken dikkati sarf etseydi yolsuzlu\u011fu ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bilecek durumda olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/strong> <\/span>Olaylar\u0131n geli\u015fimi ve ortaya konulan tespitler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; emlak al\u0131m-sat\u0131m ve in\u015faat i\u015fleri ile u\u011fra\u015fan daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n sergiledi\u011fi tutumun <strong>hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleme imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/strong> Belirtmek gerekir ki, durumun gereklerine g\u00f6re kendinden beklenen \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermeyen kimse iyiniyet iddias\u0131nda bulunamaz. <strong>Normal bir insan\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>sergiledi\u011fi davran\u0131\u015f bi\u00e7imi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda<\/strong> daval\u0131 &#8230;&#8217;\u0131n 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 1024. maddesine g\u00f6re yolsuz tescili bilen ya da bilmesi gereken ki\u015fi konumunda oldu\u011fu ve ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 1023. maddesinin koruyuculu\u011fundan yararlanamayaca\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay HGK 2024\/181 E.2025\/73 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Anla\u015fma tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 06.03.2015 tarihinde d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, eldeki davan\u0131n ise 17.11.2016 tarihinde a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, aradan ge\u00e7en <strong>1 y\u0131l 7 ay\u0131 a\u015fk\u0131n zaman\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n hak iddia etti\u011fi fark bedelin \u00f6denmemesi i\u00e7in uzun bir s\u00fcre oldu\u011fu, bu kadar uzun s\u00fcrede davac\u0131n\u0131n hatay\u0131 fark etmemesinin hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu, normal hayatta k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde \u00f6deme almayan birinin bu durumdan \u015f\u00fcphe duyaca\u011f\u0131,<\/strong> aksi bir durumun d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck ilkesi ile de ba\u011fda\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ayr\u0131ca davac\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131k veya ba\u015fka delil de sunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davan\u0131n s\u00fcresinden sonra a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve usule uygun delillendirilmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.&#8221; \/Onama\/ <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD 2024\/2918 E.2025\/3065 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;110.000,00 TL tutar\u0131ndaki paran\u0131n elden verilmesini ve bu <strong>\u00f6deme kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 makbuz veya davac\u0131n\u0131n imzas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7erir bir \u00f6deme belgesi al\u0131nmamas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu<\/strong>, <strong>7.000,00 TL ve \u00fczeri \u00f6demelerin banka kanal\u0131yla yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yasal zorunluluk oldu\u011fu<\/strong>, daval\u0131n\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n davac\u0131 ad\u0131na olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen \u00f6demeyi davac\u0131n\u0131n o\u011flu &#8230;a yapt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemesinin de iyiniyetli olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi ve davac\u0131n\u0131n hile ile ta\u015f\u0131nmaz\u0131n\u0131n elinden al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.&#8221; \/Onama\/ <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1. HD 2025\/5114 E.2025\/4615 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca; <strong>vek\u00e2let g\u00f6revinin k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuksal nedenine dayanan davalar\u0131n herhangi bir zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 veya hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcreye ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek,<\/strong> yukar\u0131da belirtilen ilkeler de g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nmak sureti ile gerekli ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131, delillerin toplanmas\u0131, i\u015fin esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi ve has\u0131l olacak sonuca g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ve gerek\u00e7eyle yaz\u0131l\u0131 bi\u00e7imde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 do\u011fru de\u011fildir\u201d\u00a0<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\"> (Yarg\u0131tay 1. Hukuk Dairesinin, 2016\/ 18465 E, 2020 \/ 1954 K)<\/span><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Vekil taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde vekilin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fi say\u0131lmas\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir. <strong>Vekilin hilesi de \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015finin hilesi olarak de\u011fil kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n hilesi olarak de\u011ferlendirilecektir.<\/strong> Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 11.02.2021 tarihli ve 2017\/1-1216 Esas, 2021\/60 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 esaslar benimsenmi\u015ftir.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay 1.HD.Esas: 2023\/2228 Karar: 2023\/3217 Tarih: 06.06.2023)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;..Bir mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay Dairesince verilen bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 sonunda, kendisi i\u00e7in o kararda g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmak ve yine o kararda belirtilen hukuksal esaslar gere\u011fince karar vermek y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olu\u015fur. Bu itibarla mahkemenin sonraki h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen ilkelere ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunmas\u0131, usule uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedenidir. Bozma karar\u0131 ile dava, usul ve yasaya uygun bir h\u00e2le sokulmu\u015f demektir. Bozma karar\u0131na uyulduktan sonra buna ayk\u0131r\u0131 karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya uygunluktan uzakla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelir ki, b\u00f6yle bir sonu\u00e7 kamu d\u00fczenine a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturur. Buna g\u00f6re <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n bozma karar\u0131na uymu\u015f olan mahkeme bu uyma karar\u0131 ile ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Daha sonra bu uyma karar\u0131ndan d\u00f6nerek direnme karar\u0131 veremez<\/span>; bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde inceleme yapmak ya da g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde yeni bir h\u00fck\u00fcm vermek zorundad\u0131r.<\/strong> <strong>An\u0131lan husus kamu d\u00fczeni ile ilgili olup, g\u00f6zetilmesi kanun ile h\u00e2kime y\u00fckletilmi\u015f bir \u00f6devdir.<\/strong> Aksine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ve uygulama gerek yarg\u0131 erki ile h\u00e2kimin, gerek mahkeme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceden uzak, sayg\u0131n ve g\u00fcvenilir olmas\u0131 ilkesi ile de ba\u011fda\u015fmaz. Bir mahkeme karar\u0131nda, taraflar\u0131n iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zetinin, anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 ve anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131 hususlar\u0131n, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli vak\u0131alar hakk\u0131nda toplanan delillerin, delillerin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirilmesinin, sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclen vak\u0131alarla, bunlardan <strong>\u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 ve hukuki sebeplerin <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">birer birer,<\/span> \u015f\u00fcphe ve teredd\u00fct uyand\u0131rmayacak \u015fekilde g\u00f6sterilmesi gereklidir.<\/strong> Bu k\u0131s\u0131m, h\u00fckm\u00fcn gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcd\u00fcr. Gerek\u00e7e, h\u00e2kimin (mahkemenin) tespit etmi\u015f oldu\u011fu maddi vak\u0131alar ile h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 aras\u0131nda bir k\u00f6pr\u00fc g\u00f6revi yapar. Gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde h\u00fckm\u00fcn dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 hukuki esaslar a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r. H\u00e2kim, taraflar\u0131n kendisine sunduklar\u0131 <strong>maddi vak\u0131alar\u0131n hukuki niteli\u011fini (hukuki sebepleri) kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131p bularak<\/strong> h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131 ve bunun nedenlerini gerek\u00e7ede a\u00e7\u0131klar. Kanunun arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlamda olu\u015fturulacak kararlar\u0131n <strong>h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kralar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k, anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r, \u00e7eli\u015fkisiz, uygulanabilir olmas\u0131n\u0131n gereklili\u011fi<\/strong> kadar; <strong>karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin de sonucu ile tam bir uyum i\u00e7inde<\/strong> <strong>o davaya konu maddi olgular\u0131n mahkemece nas\u0131l nitelendirildi\u011fini, kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn hangi nedenlere ve hukuksal d\u00fczenlemelere dayand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koyacak; k\u0131saca maddi olgular ile h\u00fck\u00fcm aras\u0131ndaki mant\u0131ksal ba\u011flant\u0131y\u0131 g\u00f6sterecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 gereki<\/strong>r. Zira taraflar\u0131n o dava y\u00f6n\u00fcnden, hukuk d\u00fczenince hangi nedenle hakl\u0131 veya haks\u0131z g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fcklerini anlay\u0131p de\u011ferlendirebilmeleri ve Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n hukuka uygunluk denetimini yapabilmesi i\u00e7in ortada usul\u00fcne uygun \u015fekilde olu\u015fturulmu\u015f, h\u00fckm\u00fcn hangi nedenle o i\u00e7erik ve kapsamda verildi\u011fini ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131yla g\u00f6steren, ifadeleri \u00f6zenle se\u00e7ilmi\u015f ve ku\u015fkuya yer vermeyecek a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131ktaki bir gerek\u00e7e b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn ve buna uyumlu h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kralar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 zorunludur. Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 22.06.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2011\/11-344 E., 436 K.; 29.02.2012 g\u00fcn ve 2011\/9-754 E., 2012\/102 K.; 13.04.2016 g\u00fcn ve 2014\/11-638 E., 2016\/501 K; 08.11.2017 g\u00fcn ve 2017\/13-1699 E.,2017\/1300 K.; 04.04.2018 g\u00fcn ve 2015\/9-2883 E., 2018\/675 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da bu hususlar benimsenmi\u015ftir. Nitekim 07.06.1976 g\u00fcn ve 1976\/3-4 E., 1976\/3 K. say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde yer alan \u201cGerek\u00e7enin ilgili bilgi ve belgelerin isabetle takdir edildi\u011fini g\u00f6sterir bi\u00e7imde ge\u00e7erli ve yasal olmas\u0131 aranmal\u0131d\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7enin bu niteli\u011fi yasa koyucunun amac\u0131na uygun oldu\u011fu gibi, karar\u0131 ayd\u0131nlatmak, keyfili\u011fi \u00f6nlemek ve taraflar\u0131 tatmin etmek niteli\u011fi de tart\u0131\u015fma g\u00f6t\u00fcrmez bir ger\u00e7ektir.\u201d \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131klama ile de ayn\u0131 ilkeye vurgu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r&#8230;.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, Esas : 2017\/2840 <\/strong><\/span><strong style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2018\/1422 Tarih : 04.10.2018)<\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu bir h\u00fck\u00fcm Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan bozulan ve Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n bu bozma karar\u0131na gerek iradi ve gerekse kanuni \u015fekilde uymu\u015f olan yerel mahkeme, bozma karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda inceleme yapmak ve h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmak zorundad\u0131r. <strong>Mahkeme uyma karar\u0131n\u0131 kald\u0131rarak, direnme karar\u0131 veremeyece\u011fi gibi, h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalarak kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olan b\u00f6l\u00fcmleri hakk\u0131nda da farkl\u0131 bir h\u00fck\u00fcm kuramaz. Bozmaya uyulmakla bozma lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fmu\u015f olur.<\/strong> H\u00fckm\u00fcn bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n bozma kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131 bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011funu belirlemek, bozman\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmek ve bu \u015fekilde usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklar\u0131 olu\u015fturup, korumakt\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan bozulan bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalm\u0131\u015f olan k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131 kesinle\u015fir. Kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar, lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturur. Bozma karar\u0131 \u00fczerine \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcm tamamen ortadan kalkar. Bu nedenle bozma karar\u0131ndan sonrada Mahkemece HMK.n\u0131n 297 vd. maddelerinde belirtilen unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yacak \u015fekilde yeni bir karar verilmek zorundad\u0131r. Ne var ki; kamu d\u00fczenine ili\u015fkin hususlar hakk\u0131nda aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131 uygulanamaz. Yani Yarg\u0131tay, kamu d\u00fczenine ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir husustan dolay\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz edenin aleyhine (temyiz etmemi\u015f olan taraf\u0131n lehine) olarak da bozabilir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc kamu d\u00fczenine ili\u015fkin hususlar\u0131 h\u00e2kim (ve Yarg\u0131tay) kendili\u011finden g\u00f6zetme ile y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. \u201cMaddi hataya dayanan bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 da usul\u00fc m\u00fcktesep hak te\u015fkil ermez. <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">(Y.9.HD.Esas No. 2018\/1808 Karar No. 2018\/5873 Tarihi: 21.03.2018)-((HGK-K.2021\/1123)<\/span><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;..<strong>.\u0130stinaf incelemesinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmeyen hususlar\u0131n temyiz incelemesine getirilemeyece\u011fi<\/strong> anla\u015f\u0131lmakla; daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen nedenler karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek nitelikte g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir&#8230;.&#8221; <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">(Y.1.HD.Esas : 2023\/6123 Karar : 2024\/3803 Tarih : 23.05.2024)<\/span><\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>&#8221;Bozmaya uyulmakla kar\u015f\u0131 taraf yarar\u0131na kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak durumunu olu\u015fturan y\u00f6nlerin ise yeniden incelenmesine hukuk\u00e7a imk\u00e2n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong> anla\u015f\u0131lmakla; temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen nedenler karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek nitelikte g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir&#8230;.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD.Esas : 2023\/6219 Karar : 2024\/7036 Tarih : 23.12.2024-Y.2.HD.01.07.2009, 9688-13014, &#8211; Y.2.HD.01.12.2014, 2014\/25298 E.2014\/24300 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;&#8230;.Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunundan farkl\u0131 olarak 01.10.2011 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununda istinaf sisteminin yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ola\u011fan kanun yolu sisteminde karar d\u00fczeltme m\u00fcessesesine yer verilmemi\u015ftir. Bu nedenle <strong>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemelerinin denetiminden ge\u00e7en karara kar\u015f\u0131 karar d\u00fczeltme yolu kapal\u0131 bulundu\u011funa g\u00f6re<\/strong> bu kararlar\u0131n yeniden incelenmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Ancak maddi hatan\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesi istenebilir&#8230;.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.1.HD.Esas : 2021\/602 Karar : 2021\/2287 Tarih : 14.04.2021)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilebilmesi i\u00e7in mahkemece bozma karar\u0131ndan esinlenilerek <strong>yeni herhangi bir delil toplanmadan \u00f6nceki deliller \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde karar verilmeli<\/strong>; karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi, \u00f6nceki karara g\u00f6re geni\u015fletilebilirse de de\u011fi\u015ftirilmemelidir. Ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla, mahkemenin yeni bir delile dayanarak veya bozmadan esinlenerek gerek\u00e7esini de\u011fi\u015ftirerek ya da daha \u00f6nce \u00fczerinde durmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir hususu bozmada i\u015faret olunan \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirerek bir karar vermi\u015f olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemez. Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n istikrar kazanm\u0131\u015f i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131na g\u00f6re; <strong>mahkemece direnme karar\u0131 verilse dahi bozma karar\u0131nda tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken hususlar\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmak, bozma sonras\u0131 yap\u0131lan ara\u015ft\u0131rma, inceleme veya toplanan yeni delillere dayanmak, \u00f6nceki kararda yer almayan ve daire denetiminden ge\u00e7memi\u015f olan yeni ve de\u011fi\u015fik gerek\u00e7e ile h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmak suretiyle verilen karar direnme karar\u0131 olmay\u0131p, bozmaya eylemli uyma sonucunda verilen yeni h\u00fck\u00fcm olarak kabul edilir.<\/strong> Mahkemece direnme karar\u0131 verildikten sonra ilk karardan farkl\u0131 bir karar verilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Gerek\u00e7e geni\u015fletilebilir ise de, verilen h\u00fckm\u00fcn ilk karardan farkl\u0131 olmamas\u0131, direnmeye ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131nda, bozma karar\u0131na hangi y\u00f6nden uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tek tek ve anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r bi\u00e7imde kaleme al\u0131nmas\u0131, h\u00fckmedilen miktarlar\u0131n do\u011fru ve \u00e7eli\u015fki olu\u015fturmayacak bi\u00e7imde ortaya konulmas\u0131 gerekir. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg\u0131tay (Kapat\u0131lan 17) 4. Hukuk Dairesinin 02.07.2018 tarihli ve 2017\/4029 Esas, 2018\/6611 Karar)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tayca bozulan Mahkeme karar\u0131 ortadan kalkar ve hukuki ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini yitirir.<\/strong> Bozulan karar sonraki karar\u0131n eki niteli\u011finde olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bu karara at\u0131f yap\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 isabetsiz oldu\u011fu gibi, bozulan karardaki gerek\u00e7eye at\u0131f yap\u0131lmas\u0131 da yasal dayanaktan yoksundur (Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 22.06.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/11-344 E., 2011\/436 K.; 29.02.2012 tarihli ve 2011\/9-754 E., 2012\/102 K.; 07.03.2019 tarihli ve 2019\/13-113 E., 2019\/248 K.; 10.12.2019 tarihli ve 2019\/1-691 E., 2019\/1319 K.; 11.11.2020 tarihli, 2020\/1-332 E., 2020\/884 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).-<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(<\/strong><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Y.<\/span>HGK 2017\/2468 E. , 2021\/608 K. )<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bozma karar\u0131, kanun yarar\u0131na temyiz konusu yap\u0131lan h\u00fckm\u00fcn hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. Dairemizin ilam\u0131nda da &#8220;H\u00fckm\u00fcn sonuca etkili olmamak \u00fczere bozuldu\u011fu&#8221; a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, kanun yarar\u0131na temyiz talebinin kabul\u00fc \u00fczerine verilen bozma karar\u0131 \u00fczerine hi\u00e7bir i\u015flem yapamaz. Hal b\u00f6yleyken, ilk derece mahkemesinin dava dosyas\u0131n\u0131 ele al\u0131p yarg\u0131lama yaparak, kesinle\u015fmi\u015f \u00f6nceki h\u00fckm\u00fc ortadan kald\u0131rmas\u0131 yasal dayanaktan yoksundur. Bu sebeple sonradan verilen ve yasal dayana\u011f\u0131 bulunmayan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozularak ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> (Y.2.HD.Esas : 2018\/7307 Karar : 2019\/188 Tarih : 15.01.2019)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">54.6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 177\/1 maddesinde &#8220;\u0131slah, tahkikat\u0131n sona ermesine kadar yap\u0131labilir&#8221; denilmekle maddenin a\u00e7\u0131k ibaresinden \u0131slah\u0131n yaln\u0131z tahkikat\u0131n sona ermesine yani hakimin tahkikat\u0131n bitti\u011fini ilan etmesine kadar m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilece\u011finin kastedilmektedir. Bu a\u015famadan sonra taraflar\u0131n bu hakk\u0131 kullanamayacaklar\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. <strong>Bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada \u0131slah yap\u0131lamaz.<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Y.B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurul Esas : 2015\/1 Karar : 2016\/1 Tarih : 06.05.2016)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Her iki taraf\u0131n da bozmaya uyulmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki beyanlar\u0131<\/strong> ve mahkemenin de bozmaya uyma karar\u0131, taraflar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden <strong>usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011furur.<\/strong> Usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde mahkemece bunun ihlali anlam\u0131na gelecek \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulamaz. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg.7.Hukuk Dairesi 2015\/9849 E.2015\/6176 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Bir taraf\u0131n bilirki\u015fi raporuna itiraz etmemesi ile di\u011fer taraf lehine usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011far.<\/strong> <em>(&#8230; Kuru, Medeni Usul Hukuku Cilt I, Yetkin Yay\u0131nc\u0131l\u0131k, Ankara: 2020, s.807)<\/em>. Rapora itiraz etmeyen taraf bak\u0131m\u0131ndan 6100 &#8230; Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununun 281 inci maddesi gere\u011fi bilirki\u015fi raporu kesinle\u015fti\u011finden kar\u015f\u0131<br \/>\ntaraf lehine usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fdu\u011fu kabul edilmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca, <strong>aleyhe olan hususlar\u0131n kabul edilmedi\u011fi beyan edilse bile itiraz nedenleri g\u00f6sterilerek ek ya da yeni rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n talep edilmedi\u011fi ve rapora g\u00f6re karar verilmesinin talep edildi\u011fi durumlarda da usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 benimsenmi\u015ftir<\/strong> <em>(Emsal, Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 18\/02\/2021 tarihli ve 2018\/10(21)-94 E., 2021\/111 K. &#8230; ilam\u0131, Yarg\u0131tay 17. Hukuk Dairesinin 13\/09\/2017 tarihli ve 2016\/14455 E. , 2017\/7655 K. &#8230; ilam\u0131, Yarg\u0131tay 6. Hukuk Dairesinin 25\/11\/2021 tarihli ve 2021\/4525 E. 2021\/1793 K. &#8230; ilam\u0131). <\/em>\u00d6l\u00fcme ba\u011fl\u0131 tasarruflar, mutlak olarak tenkise tabidir. Bir di\u011fer deyi\u015fle, \u00f6l\u00fcme ba\u011fl\u0131 tasarruflar\u0131n tenkise tabi tutulabilmesi i\u00e7in, miras b\u0131rakan\u0131n sakl\u0131 pay\u0131 ihlal kast\u0131yla hareket etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 aranmaz. Vasiyetnameler, \u00f6l\u00fcme ba\u011fl\u0131 tasarruftur. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla <strong>vasiyetnameler, sakl\u0131 pay\u0131 ihlal kast\u0131 aranmaks\u0131z\u0131n mutlak olarak tenkise tabidir. <\/strong>(Bozmaya uyulmakla kar\u015f\u0131 taraf yarar\u0131na kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak durumunu olu\u015fturan y\u00f6nlerin ise yeniden incelenmesine hukuk\u00e7a imk\u00e2n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131) anla\u015f\u0131lmakla; temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen nedenler karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek nitelikte g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. <strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">(<span style=\"color: #993300;\">Ya<\/span>rg.7.Hukuk Dairesi 2023\/1408 E.2023\/4495 K.)<\/span><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p id=\"usuli-kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f-hakk\u0131n-i\u0307stisnalar\u0131\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Usuli Kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Hakk\u0131n \u0130stisnalar\u0131:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>1. Mahkemenin G\u00f6revi :<\/strong>\u00a0Mahkemenin g\u00f6revi ile ilgili usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan s\u00f6z edilemez. \u015e\u00f6yle ki; Yarg\u0131tay mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131, g\u00f6rev itiraz\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n g\u00f6rev d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir sebeple bozar ve mahkeme bu karara uyarsa bozma d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan g\u00f6rev hususu usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturmayacak, yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada mahkeme taraflar\u0131n itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine ya da kendili\u011finden g\u00f6revsizlik karar\u0131 verebilecektir. Ancak temyizde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6rev itiraz\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ve bu husus Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan nazara al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131k ya da z\u0131mn\u00ee olarak reddedilmi\u015f ise bu takdirde usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak g\u00f6rev konusunda da olu\u015facak ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yapan mahkeme g\u00f6rev konusunda karar veremeyecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>2. \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131 (\u0130BK) :<\/strong>\u00a0\u00d6te yandan Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yeni bir i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 da usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131d\u0131r. Az yukar\u0131da bahsedilen 09.05.1960 tarihli \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131na g\u00f6re, i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme kararlar\u0131 usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ra\u011fmen g\u00f6r\u00fclmekte olan davalara da uygulan\u0131r. \u0130lk derece mahkemesi usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa bile yeni i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131na g\u00f6re karar verecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>3. Yeni Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fc :<\/strong>\u00a0Yine karar hen\u00fcz kesinle\u015fmeden ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olarak \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc de usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturur. B\u00f6yle bir halde de usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa da yeni \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ve ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olan kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn uygulanmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>4. Anayasa Mahkemesinin \u0130ptal Karar\u0131:<\/strong>\u00a0Bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc Anayasa Mahkemesince iptal edilirse iptal edilen kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa bile uygulanacak \u00f6ncelik usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakta de\u011fil Anayasa Mahkemesinin iptal karar\u0131nda olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>5. Kesin H\u00fck\u00fcm :<\/strong>\u00a0Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n bir di\u011fer istisnas\u0131 ise kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr. Bozmadan sonra usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ile kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm \u00e7eli\u015fiyorsa \u00f6ncelik usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak da de\u011fil, kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan ve dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak re\u2019sen nazara al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmdedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>6. Kamu D\u00fczenine Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k :<\/strong>\u00a0Kamu d\u00fczenine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k da usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnalar\u0131ndan bir di\u011feridir. Ger\u00e7ekten de kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan bir husus ile usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak \u00e7eli\u015fiyorsa bu h\u00e2lde kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan h\u00e2l usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ecektir.\u00a0Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre\u00a0kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lmakla hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre s\u00f6z konusu ise usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan bahsedilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>7. Maddi Hata :<\/strong> Nihayet son olarak Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n karar\u0131 her t\u00fcrl\u00fc yorumun, hukuki de\u011ferlendirme veya delil takdiri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ve tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z \u015fekilde ba\u015fka bir \u015fekilde yorumlanamayacak a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131kta maddi hataya dayal\u0131 ise ve onunla s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu halde usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesi uygulanmayacakt\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan dosya kapsam\u0131na uygun olmayacak \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131k ve tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z bir maddi hata yap\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde, bu hata, usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r.<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> (HGK-K.2021\/416)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Maddi hataya dayal\u0131 bozmaya uyma, Usuli Kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Hak kazand\u0131rmaz. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(HGK-K.2021\/1118)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere bir davada, mahkemenin veya yanlar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f olduklar\u0131 bir usul i\u015flemi sebebiyle taraflardan biri lehine dolay\u0131s\u0131yla di\u011feri aleyhine do\u011fan ve g\u00f6zetilmesi zorunlu olan hakka, <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak<\/span> denilir.<\/strong> \u00d6rne\u011fin mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131yla bozma karar\u0131 lehine olan yan bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011far. <strong>Bir mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay Dairesince verilen bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 sonunda kendisi i\u00e7in o kararda g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmak ve yine o kararda belirtilen hukuksal esaslar gere\u011fince karar vermek y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olu\u015fur.<\/strong> Bu itibarla mahkemenin sonraki h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozmada g\u00f6sterilen ilkelere ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunmas\u0131, usule uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bir bozma nedenidir. Bozma karar\u0131 ile dava, usul ve yasaya uygun bir hale sokulmu\u015f demektir. Bozmaya uyulduktan sonra buna ayk\u0131r\u0131 karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya uygunluktan uzakla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelir ki, b\u00f6yle bir sonu\u00e7 kamu d\u00fczenine a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturur. Buna g\u00f6re <strong>Yarg\u0131tay&#8217;\u0131n bozma karar\u0131na uymu\u015f olan mahkeme, bu uyma karar\u0131 ile ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Daha sonra bu uyma karar\u0131ndan d\u00f6nerek direnme karar\u0131 veremez.<\/strong> <strong>Bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde inceleme yapmak ya da g\u00f6sterilen bi\u00e7imde yeni bir h\u00fck\u00fcm vermek zorundad\u0131r.<\/strong> Ayn\u0131 ilke Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 05.02.2003 g\u00fcn ve 2003\/8-83 E.- 2003\/72 K.; 17.02.2010 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/9-71 E.-2010\/87 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da benimsenmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile kabul edilen \u201cusuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak\u201d olgusunun, bir\u00e7ok hukuk kural\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi yine Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f <strong>istisnalar\u0131<\/strong> bulunmaktad\u0131r: <strong>Mahkemenin bozmaya uymas\u0131ndan sonra yeni bir i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 ( 09.05.1960 g\u00fcn ve 21\/9 Say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK ) ya da ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili bir yeni kanun \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131<\/strong> kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131na uyulmu\u015f olmakla olu\u015fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak hukuk\u00e7a de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131mayacakt\u0131r. Benzer \u015fekilde <strong>uygulanmas\u0131 gereken bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc, h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015fmeden \u00f6nce Anayasa Mahkemesince iptaline karar verilirse,<\/strong> usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka g\u00f6re de\u011fil, Anayasa Mahkemesi&#8217;nin iptal karar\u0131ndan sonra olu\u015fan yeni duruma g\u00f6re karar verilebilecektir ( HGK&#8217;nun 21.01.2004 g\u00fcn ve 2004\/10-44 E.- 19 K.; 03.02.2010 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/4-40 E.- 2010\/54 K. ). Bu say\u0131lanlar\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda <strong>ayr\u0131ca g\u00f6rev konusu, hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre, kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm itiraz\u0131, har\u00e7 ve maddi hataya dayanan bozma kararlar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi kamu d\u00fczeni ile ilgili konularda usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan s\u00f6z edilemez<\/strong> <em>(Kuru, B: Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc-6. Bask\u0131, Cilt 5, s. 4738 vd )<\/em>. Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in bir davada ya taraflar ya mahkeme ya da Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131k bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan ve istisnalar aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmayan bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine do\u011fmu\u015f ve kendisine uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan bir hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilebilmesi gerekir. T\u00fcm bu hususlar bir arada de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; somut olayda mahkemece 11.12.2014 tarihli celsede bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ara karar verildi\u011fi halde, \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmesine y\u00f6nelik h\u00fck\u00fcm kurularak davan\u0131n &#8230; Enerji Nak. \u0130n\u015f. Ltd. \u015eti. y\u00f6n\u00fcnden k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne, di\u011fer daval\u0131lar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Oysa, 11.12.2014 tarihli oturumda bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a karar verilmesi ile davac\u0131 yarar\u0131na usule dair kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fmu\u015ftur. Bu karar sonras\u0131 mahkemenin yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015f, bozma karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda i\u015flem yapmak ve gerekli karar\u0131 vermekten ibarettir. Kural olarak hakim ara karar\u0131ndan d\u00f6nebilirse de bozmaya uyulmas\u0131na dair karar, bunun istisnalar\u0131ndand\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla bozma karar\u0131na uyan mahkeme, bununla ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130ster ayn\u0131 oturumda, ister daha sonraki oturumlarda olsun bundan d\u00f6nerek eski h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnemez. Verilen karar direnme karar\u0131 de\u011fil yeni bir karar niteli\u011findedir. <strong>Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kurumunun yukarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan istisnalar\u0131 da somut olayda s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir.<\/strong> O halde mahkemece uyulan bozma karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda i\u015flem yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken, usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bi\u00e7imde verilen direnme karar\u0131 isabetsizdir.&#8221; <span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong>(Yarg.HGK. E. 2015\/22-1848 K. 2017\/628 T. 5.4.2017)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C. <\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY <\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>DOKUZUNCU HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Esas : 2024\/4606<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Karar : 2024\/5325<\/span><\/strong><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Tarih : 21.03.2024<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dairemizin 14.12.2022 tarihli ve 2022\/16498 Esas, 2022\/16753 Karar &#8230; il\u00e2m\u0131nda <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesi<\/strong><\/span>\u015fu \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r: &#8230;. Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere 6100 &#8230; Kanun&#8217;da <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kavram\u0131<\/strong><\/span>na ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu kurum, <strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">davalar\u0131n uzamas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek, hukuki alanda istikrar sa\u011flamak ve kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 genel g\u00fcvenin sars\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay uygulamalar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f, \u00f6\u011fretide kabul g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f ve usul<\/span> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">hukukunun vazge\u00e7ilmez, ana ilkelerinden biri h\u00e2line gelmi\u015ftir<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">.<\/span> Anlam itibar\u0131yla bir davada, mahkemenin ya da taraflar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine do\u011fmu\u015f ve kendisine uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan &#8230; ifade etmektedir. Mahkemenin, Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 ile bozma karar\u0131 lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na bir usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fabilece\u011fi gibi, baz\u0131 konular\u0131n bozma karar\u0131 kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalmas\u0131 yolu ile de usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilir <em>(Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulu, 09.05.1960 tarihli ve 1960\/21 Esas, 1960\/9 Karar &#8230; karar).<\/em> H\u00fckm\u00fcn bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n bozma kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131 bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011funu belirlemek, bozman\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmek ve bu \u015fekilde usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklar\u0131 olu\u015fturup, korumakt\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan bozulan bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalm\u0131\u015f olan k\u0131s\u0131mlar, lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturur (<em>Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulu, 04.02.1959 tarihli ve 1959\/13 Esas, 1959\/5 Karar &#8230; karar) <\/em>Temyizen incelenen \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozmaya uygun oldu\u011fu, kararda ve karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n somut olaya uygulanmas\u0131nda bir isabetsizlik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong> bozmaya uyulmakla kar\u015f\u0131 taraf yarar\u0131na kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak durumunu olu\u015fturan y\u00f6nlerin ise yeniden incelenmesine hukuk\u00e7a imk\u00e2n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong><\/span>anla\u015f\u0131lmakla&#8230;.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ONBE\u015e\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas : 2020\/1323<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/124<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Tarih : 21.01.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 141\/1. maddesinde taraflar\u0131n yarg\u0131lamada iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131 ne zamana kadar de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecekleri d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu madde uyar\u0131nca taraflar\u0131n cevaba cevap ve ikinci cevap dilek\u00e7eleri ile serbest\u00e7e, \u00f6n inceleme a\u015famas\u0131nda ancak kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k muvafakati ile \u00f6n inceleme duru\u015fmas\u0131nda taraflardan birisi gelmez ise gelen taraf\u0131n, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n muvafakati aranmaks\u0131z\u0131n iddia ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi yahut de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Yine HMK\u2019n\u0131n 144\/2. maddesinde, iddia ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilip de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi konusunda \u0131slah ve kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k muvafakati h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin sakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu anlamda \u0131slah, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131n olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlarda yasa\u011f\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren iddia ve savunmalar\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirme noktas\u0131nda taraflar i\u00e7in tek \u00e7are olmaktad\u0131r. Kavram olarak \u0131slah; taraflardan birinin yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu usul i\u015fleminin tamamen veya k\u0131smen d\u00fczeltilmesidir (6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK. m. 176). Taraflar ihmal, unutma, yetersiz bilgi ve benzeri sebeplerle eksik ya da hatal\u0131 \u015fekilde iddia ve savunmada bulunmu\u015f olabilecekleri gibi, yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda meydana gelen geli\u015fmeler neticesinde de yarg\u0131laman\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda sunduklar\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131nda de\u011fi\u015fiklik yapma ihtiyac\u0131 duyabilirler. Islah m\u00fcessesesi, dava de\u011fi\u015ftirme, ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle iddia ve savunman\u0131n de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi veya geni\u015fletilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bertaraf eden bir imkand\u0131r. Zira bu suretle, asl\u0131nda yasal itiraz ile kar\u015f\u0131lanabilecek olan herhangi bir taraf muamelesi, \u0131slah kurumu yard\u0131m\u0131 ile art\u0131k bu itiraz\u0131 davet etmeksizin yap\u0131labilmektedir (&#8230; S: Medeni Yarg\u0131lama Hukuku, C.I.II.B.5, &#8230; 1992, s.534). Islah, mahkemeye y\u00f6neltilen tek tarafl\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir irade beyan\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, yasal \u015fartlar\u0131 yerine getirildi\u011fi takdirde, kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n ya da mahkemenin kabul\u00fcne ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n yap\u0131labilir. \u0130ddia ve savunmay\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirme ya da geni\u015fletme say\u0131lmayan hallerde veya kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n geni\u015fletme ve de\u011fi\u015ftirmeye r\u0131za g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi hallerde \u0131slaha ba\u015fvurmaya gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Davan\u0131n tamamen \u0131slah\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu gibi k\u0131smen \u0131slah\u0131 da m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Ancak \u0131slah\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131, Kanun uyar\u0131nca zaman bak\u0131m\u0131ndan s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve HMK&#8217;n\u0131n <strong>&#8220;Islah\u0131n Zaman\u0131 ve \u015eekli&#8221;<\/strong> ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 177. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda tahkikat\u0131n sona ermesine kadar \u0131slah\u0131n yap\u0131labilece\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu noktada yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hangi a\u015famas\u0131na kadar \u0131slah\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirleyebilmek i\u00e7in tahkikat evresinden bahsetmek gerekmektedir. Zira \u0131slah\u0131n zaman bak\u0131m\u0131ndan s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131,<strong> bozmadan sonra \u0131slah\u0131n yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ile do\u011frudan ilgilidir.<\/strong> Tahkikat, HMK\u2019n\u0131n 147. maddesi uyar\u0131nca \u00f6n inceleme a\u015famas\u0131n\u0131n tamamlanmas\u0131ndan sonra ba\u015flamaktad\u0131r. Bu anlamda tahkikat evresinde i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilerek delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi sonucu bir karar verilmek \u00fczere taraflar duru\u015fmaya davet edilir. Bu y\u00f6n\u00fcyle tahkikat evresi, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n en \u00f6nemli ve uzun a\u015famas\u0131 olarak nitelendirilmektedir. Mahkeme, tahkikat\u0131n bitiminden sonra, s\u00f6zl\u00fc yarg\u0131lama ve h\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in tayin olacak g\u00fcn ve saatte mahkemede haz\u0131r bulunmalar\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla iki taraf\u0131 davet eder. Taraflara \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lacak olan davetiyede, belirlenen g\u00fcn ve saatte mahkemede haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131klar\u0131 takdirde yokluklar\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm verilece\u011fi hususu bildirilir. S\u00f6zl\u00fc yarg\u0131lamada mahkeme, taraflara son s\u00f6zlerini sorar ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc verir (Madde 186). HMK\u2019n\u0131n 184. ve maddeleri gere\u011fince tahkikat\u0131 gerektiren bir husus kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Mahkeme, tahkikat\u0131n bitti\u011fini taraflara tefhim eder ve bu tefhim ile tahkikat a\u015famas\u0131 sona erer. Bununla birlikte, bozmadan sonra \u0131slah yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 hususu Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Daireleri ve \u00f6\u011freti aras\u0131nda tart\u0131\u015fmal\u0131 bir hususken, 22.07.2020 y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fck tarihli 7251 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile de\u011fi\u015fen 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 177\/2. maddesinde bozmadan sonra \u0131slah konusuna a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k getirilmi\u015ftir. Bu maddeye g\u00f6re; <strong>\u201cYarg\u0131tay\u0131n bozma karar\u0131ndan veya b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin kald\u0131rma karar\u0131ndan sonra dosya ilk derece mahkemesine g\u00f6nderildi\u011finde, ilk derece mahkemesinin tahkikata ili\u015fkin bir i\u015flem yapmas\u0131 halinde tahkikat sona erinceye kadar da \u0131slah yap\u0131labilir. Ancak bozma karar\u0131na uymakla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan hukuki durum ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lamaz\u201d<\/strong> d\u00fczenlemesine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gereken bir di\u011fer husus ise <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak<\/strong><\/span>kavram\u0131d\u0131r. Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak, bir davada, mahkemenin veya taraflar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine (di\u011feri aleyhine) do\u011fmu\u015f ve kendisine uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan hakt\u0131r. Usul hukukunun temel prensiplerinden birisi olan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kavram\u0131, gerek HUMK, gerekse HMK\u2019da d\u00fczenlenmemesine ra\u011fmen gerek \u00f6\u011fretide gerekse uygulamada kabul edilmi\u015ftir. <strong>Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n bozma karar\u0131 nedeniyle kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak iki \u00e7e\u015fit olup, birincisi Mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 ile, bozma karar\u0131 lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak, ikincisi baz\u0131 konular\u0131n bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalmas\u0131 ile do\u011fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklard\u0131r. Bozma karar\u0131na uymu\u015f olmas\u0131 halinde Mahkeme, bu uyma karar\u0131 ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olup, usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesi uyar\u0131nca lehine bozulan taraf yarar\u0131na ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme yapmak zorundad\u0131r<\/strong> ( 04.02.1959 g\u00fcn ve 13\/5 say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK). <strong>Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak yukar\u0131da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere a\u00e7\u0131k bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcyle d\u00fczenlenmemi\u015f olsa da \u00f6nemli ve temel bir hukuk ilkesidir.<\/strong> <strong>Ancak usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesinin de istisnalar\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Geriye etkili kanun de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fi, g\u00f6rev kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, sonradan ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 (09.05.1960 g\u00fcn ve 21\/9 say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK), hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre, kamu d\u00fczeni gibi hususlar kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131n\u0131n istisnalar\u0131ndand\u0131r.<\/strong> Bu durumda usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furabilmesi i\u00e7in; bir davada ya taraflar ya mahkeme ya da Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131k bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan ve istisnalar aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmayan bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine do\u011fmu\u015f uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan bir hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilebilmesi gerekir (HGK.nun 12.07.2006 T., 2006\/4-519 E, 2006\/527 K, 03.12.2008 T., 2008\/10-730 E., 2008\/732 K.). Zira <strong>usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesi kamu d\u00fczeniyle ilgilidir<\/strong> (09.05.1960 T., 21\/9; 04.02.1959 g\u00fcn 13\/5 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131). S<strong>onradan ayn\u0131 hususta bir kanun \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131 oldu\u011fu, usule ili\u015fkin kanun de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olarak uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi,<\/strong> mahkemece verilen nihai karardan sonra de\u011fi\u015fiklik yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi, bu de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fin uygulanmas\u0131nda zorunluluk bulundu\u011fu Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131yla a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Yarg\u0131tay HGK 20.02.2008 g\u00fcn, 2008\/13-160 E., 2008\/147 K.). A\u00e7\u0131klanan t\u00fcm bu nedenlerle mahkemece \u0131slahla artt\u0131r\u0131lan talebin de de\u011ferlendirilerek, sonucuna uygun karar verilmesi gerekmekle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu y\u00f6nden bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir&#8230;&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Mahkemece bozma ilam\u0131na uyulmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen bozma ilam\u0131 do\u011frultusunda ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve inceleme yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. 09.05.1960 tarihli ve 21\/9 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak<\/strong> <\/span>kural\u0131na de\u011finilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131nda tarif edildi\u011fi \u00fczere mahkemenin, bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131yla meydana gelen bozma gere\u011fince i\u015flem yapma ve h\u00fck\u00fcm verme durumu, taraflardan birisi lehine ve di\u011feri aleyhine h\u00fck\u00fcm verme neticesini do\u011furacak bir durumdur. Buna da usul hukukunda <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>&#8220;usuli m\u00fcktesep hak&#8221;<\/strong><\/span> denilmektedir. <strong>Mahkeme uydu\u011fu bozma karar\u0131na uygun olarak karar vermek zorunda oldu\u011fu gibi ilgili <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">Yarg\u0131tay Dairesi de<\/span> kural olarak <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">bozma karar\u0131 ile benimsemi\u015f oldu\u011fu ilke ile ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r<\/span>.&#8221;<\/strong> <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>(Yarg.7.Hukuk Dairesi 2025\/1004 E.2025\/2294 K.)<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k hakk\u0131nda kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunuyorsa ayn\u0131 konuda, ayn\u0131 taraflar aras\u0131nda ve ayn\u0131 dava sebebine dayan\u0131larak yeni bir dava a\u00e7\u0131lamaz. Kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm itiraz\u0131 davan\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir ve mahkemenin de davan\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda kesin h\u00fckm\u00fcn varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kendili\u011finden g\u00f6zetip, davay\u0131 kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm bulundu\u011fu (dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan) gerek\u00e7esiyle reddetmesi gerekir. Yine kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm itiraz\u0131 mahkemede ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmemi\u015f olsa dahi ilk defa Yarg\u0131tay\u2019da (temyiz veya karar d\u00fczeltme a\u015famas\u0131nda) ve dahas\u0131 bozmadan sonra da ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir ve taraflar\u0131n iradesine de ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan mutlak bir etkiye sahiptir<\/strong>.\u00a0O nedenle kesin h\u00fckm\u00fcn varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir kesiminde nazara al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 di\u011fer bir kesiminde ele al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 engellemez <em>(Kuru, B.:Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc, 6. Bask\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2001, C. V, s. 4980 vd.).<\/em><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm (<\/strong><strong>HMK Madde 303)<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">(1) Bir davaya ait \u015fekl\u00ee anlamda kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olan h\u00fckm\u00fcn, di\u011fer bir davada maddi anlamda kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm olu\u015fturabilmesi i\u00e7in, <strong>her iki davan\u0131n taraflar\u0131n\u0131n, dava sebeplerinin ve ilk davan\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 ile ikinci davaya ait talep sonucunun ayn\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">(2) Bir h\u00fck\u00fcm, davada veya kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k davada ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen taleplerden, sadece h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olanlar hakk\u0131nda kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm te\u015fkil eder.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">(3) Kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm, taraflar\u0131n k\u00fcll\u00ee halefleri hakk\u0131nda da ge\u00e7erlidir.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">(4) Bir dava dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm, o h\u00fckm\u00fcn kesinle\u015fmesinden sonra dava konusu \u015feyin m\u00fclkiyetini taraflar\u0131n birisinden devralan yahut dava konusu \u015fey \u00fczerinde s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 bir ayni hak veya fer\u2019\u00ee zilyetlik kazanan ki\u015filer hakk\u0131nda da ge\u00e7erlidir. Ancak, T\u00fcrk Meden\u00ee Kanununun iyiniyetle mal edinmeye ait h\u00fck\u00fcmleri sakl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">(5) M\u00fcteselsil bor\u00e7lulardan biri veya birka\u00e7\u0131 ile alacakl\u0131 aras\u0131nda yahut m\u00fcteselsil alacakl\u0131lardan biri veya birka\u00e7\u0131 ile bor\u00e7lu aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm, di\u011ferleri hakk\u0131nda ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/1249<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Karar : 2019\/530<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tarih : 08.05.2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 294\/1 maddesinde mahkemelerin usule veya esasa ili\u015fkin bir nihai kararla davay\u0131 sona erdirece\u011fi belirtilmektedir. Bilindi\u011fi gibi, h\u00e2kimin davadan el \u00e7ekmesini gerektiren, davay\u0131 sonu\u00e7land\u0131ran kararlar\u0131na nihai kararlar denilmektedir. Nihai kararlar, usule ili\u015fkin nihai kararlar veya esasa ili\u015fkin nihai kararlar (h\u00fck\u00fcmler) olmak \u00fczere ikiye ayr\u0131l\u0131r. Usule ili\u015fkin nihai kararlar, davan\u0131n esas\u0131yla ilgili olmayan kararlar olup, ba\u015fka bir ifade ile mahkemenin maddi hukuk bak\u0131m\u0131ndan de\u011fil de usul hukuku bak\u0131m\u0131ndan verdi\u011fi kararlard\u0131r. Bu nedenle, mahkemece verilen <strong>g\u00f6revsizlik, yetkisizlik, davan\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin kararlar usule ili\u015fkin nihai kararlar oldu\u011fu gibi, dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fu nedeni ile verilen, usulden ret kararlar\u0131 (HMK m.115\/2) da, usule ili\u015fkin nihai kararlard\u0131r.<\/strong> Esasa ili\u015fkin kararlar ise, h\u00e2kimin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131n\u0131 inceleyerek verdi\u011fi kararlard\u0131r (HMK m. 294\/1). Yani davada ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen taleplerin maddi hukuk a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan incelenerek esas bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kabul veya reddine ya da k\u0131smen kabul ve k\u0131smen reddine ili\u015fkin kararlard\u0131r. Esasa ili\u015fkin nihai karar ile taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k esastan sona erer ve h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015fince art\u0131k o uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k hakk\u0131nda, ayn\u0131 taraflar aras\u0131nda, ayn\u0131 dava sebebine dayanarak yeni bir dava a\u00e7\u0131lamaz; a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131rsa, kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmden dolay\u0131 reddedilir (HMK m.303) <em>(Kuru, B.: Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc, C.III, 4.b., \u0130stanbul 2001, s.3005).<\/em> <strong>Usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kurumu, davalar\u0131n uzamas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek, hukuki alanda istikrar sa\u011flamak ve kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 genel g\u00fcvenin sars\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay uygulamalar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f, \u00f6\u011fretide kabul g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f ve usul hukukunun vazge\u00e7ilmez, ana ilkelerinden biri h\u00e2line gelmi\u015ftir<\/strong>. Anlam itibariyle, bir davada mahkemenin ya da taraflar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine do\u011fmu\u015f ve kendisine uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan hakk\u0131 ifade etmektedir. \u00d6rne\u011fin <strong>h\u00e2kimin bir tarafa kesin s\u00fcre vermesi ile kar\u015f\u0131 taraf lehine kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011far.<\/strong> Nitekim HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 23.10.1981 tarihli ve 1981\/15-2296 E., 1981\/687 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda &#8220;&#8230;.mesel\u00e2; bir Yarg\u0131tay bozma ilam\u0131na uyulmas\u0131na, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kendisine d\u00fc\u015fen, takdiri delil ile iddias\u0131n\u0131 ger\u00e7e\u011fe yak\u0131n bir \u015fekilde ispat etmi\u015f ve fakat h\u00e2kime bir kanaat vermemi\u015f olan tarafa Usul\u00fcn 365. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fcnce h\u00e2kim taraf\u0131ndan resen and y\u00f6neltilmesine; taraflardan birine kesin s\u00fcre verilmesine (Usul 164) ili\u015fkin ara kararlar\u0131 bu nitelikte olup bunlardan d\u00f6nme (r\u00fccu) caiz de\u011fildir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc usule ait kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak m\u00fcessesi, Usul Yasas\u0131n\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ana esaslardand\u0131r ve k<strong>amu d\u00fczeni ile de ilgilidir.<\/strong> (09.05.1960 tarihli ve 21 E., 9 K. ve 04.02.1959 tarihli ve 13 E., 5 K. say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Kararlar\u0131 gerek\u00e7elerinden)&#8230;.&#8221; denilmek sureti ile ara karar\u0131 ile olu\u015fan kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak \u00e7e\u015fitlerinden bahsedilmi\u015ftir. Hemen belirtelim ki, gerek 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc Kanununda, gerek 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununda <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>\u201cusuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak\u201d<\/strong><\/span> kavram\u0131na ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Konu, yarg\u0131 i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ile geli\u015fmi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan kanun yolunda olu\u015fan kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklar da s\u00f6z konusudur. \u015e\u00f6yle ki, bir mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay dairesince verilen bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 sonucunda, kendisi i\u00e7in o kararda g\u00f6sterilen \u015fekilde inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma yaparak yine o kararda belirtilen hukuki esaslar gere\u011fince h\u00fck\u00fcm verme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc do\u011far. \u201cUsuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak\u201d olarak tan\u0131mlayaca\u011f\u0131m\u0131z bu olgu mahkemeye, h\u00fckm\u00fcne uydu\u011fu Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131nda belirtilen \u00e7er\u00e7evede i\u015flem yapma ve h\u00fck\u00fcm kurma zorunlulu\u011fu getirmektedir (09.05.1960 tarihli ve 21\/9 say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK). Mahkemenin, Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 ile bozma karar\u0131 lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na bir usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fabilece\u011fi gibi baz\u0131 konular\u0131n bozma karar\u0131 kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalmas\u0131 yolu ile de usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilir. <strong>Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan bozulan bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalm\u0131\u015f olan k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131 kesinle\u015fir.<\/strong> <strong>Bozma karar\u0131na uymu\u015f olan mahkeme kesinle\u015fen bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar hakk\u0131nda yeniden inceleme yaparak karar veremez.<\/strong> Bir ba\u015fka anlat\u0131mla, kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar, lehine olan taraf yarar\u0131na usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturur (04.02.1959 tarihli ve 13\/5 say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK). 6460 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu \u0130le Baz\u0131 Kanunlarda De\u011fi\u015fiklik Yap\u0131lmas\u0131na Dair Kanun ile eklenen HUMK\u2019un 439. maddesinin 6. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n m\u00fcstekar i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131yla hukuk hayat\u0131m\u0131za girdi\u011fi, Y\u00fcksek Mahkemenin bu ilkeye uygun davranarak bir\u00e7ok ilk derece mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131 bozdu\u011fu, \u00e7ok istisnai olarak usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131 dikkate almaks\u0131z\u0131n karar verdi\u011fi, asl\u0131nda verilen bu kararlar\u0131n istinaf kanun yolunun hen\u00fcz hayata ge\u00e7irilememesinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan oldu\u011fu, bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceden hareketle, de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fin sadece 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un istinaf sisteminden \u00f6nce y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olan metninde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, d\u00fczenlemenin kal\u0131c\u0131 \u015fekilde 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunda da yer almas\u0131, Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n &#8220;usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak&#8221; kavram\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7ti\u011fi \u015feklinde bir alg\u0131 do\u011furabilece\u011finden, s\u00f6z konusu h\u00fckm\u00fcn b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemeleri faaliyete ge\u00e7inceye kadar hukuki varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmesinin ama\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015f ve usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n \u00f6nemi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile kabul edilen \u201cusuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak\u201d olgusunun, bir\u00e7ok hukuk kural\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi yine Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f istisnalar\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Mahkemenin bozmaya uymas\u0131ndan sonra yeni bir i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 durumunda Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131 ile olu\u015fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak de\u011fer ta\u015f\u0131mayacakt\u0131r. 09.05.1960 tarihli ve 21\/9 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda (Y\u0130BK) &#8220;&#8230;sonradan \u00e7\u0131kan i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n Temyiz Mahkemesinin bozma karar\u0131na uyulmakla meydana gelen usule ait m\u00fcktesep hak esas\u0131n\u0131n istisnas\u0131 olarak, hen\u00fcz mahkemede veya Temyiz Mahkemesinde bulunan b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u015flere tatbikinin gerekli oldu\u011funa&#8230;&#8221; karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bunun gibi bozmaya uyulmas\u0131ndan sonra o konuda y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren yeni bir kanun kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bozma ilam\u0131na uyulmakla olu\u015fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n da bir de\u011feri kalmayacakt\u0131r. HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 12.03.1997 tarihli ve 1997\/7-975 E., 1997\/196 K. ve 06.11.1996 tarihli ve 1996\/17-561 E., 1997\/744 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda bu hususa vurgu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Benzer \u015fekilde uygulanmas\u0131 gereken bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015fmeden \u00f6nce Anayasa Mahkemesince iptaline karar verilmesi h\u00e2linde usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka g\u00f6re de\u011fil, Anayasa Mahkemesinin iptal karar\u0131ndan sonra olu\u015fan yeni duruma g\u00f6re karar verilebilecektir (HGK. 21.01.2004 tarihli ve 2004\/10-44 E., 2004\/19 K. ve 30.01.2013 tarihli ve 2012\/1-683 E.,2013\/165 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131). G\u00f6rev konusu da usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131d\u0131r. Bu husus 04.02.1959 tarihli ve 1957\/13 E., 1959\/5 K. say\u0131l\u0131 Y\u0130BK&#8217;da &#8220;&#8230;kaide olarak usuli m\u00fcktesep hak h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn vazife konusunda tatbik yeri olmayaca\u011f\u0131na ve duru\u015fman\u0131n bitti\u011fi bildirilinceye kadar vazifesizlik karar\u0131 verebilece\u011fine,&#8230;&#8221; \u015feklinde ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Bu say\u0131lanlar\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre, kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm itiraz\u0131 ve har\u00e7 gibi kamu d\u00fczenine ili\u015fkin konularda da usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan s\u00f6z edilemez. Ayr\u0131ca maddi hataya dayanan bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 ile usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak do\u011fmaz. Burada k\u0131saca <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>&#8220;maddi hata&#8221;<\/strong><\/span> kavram\u0131ndan bahsetmek gerekir. <strong>Maddi yan\u0131lg\u0131 kavram\u0131ndan ama\u00e7; hukuksal de\u011ferlendirme ve denetim d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, tamamen maddi olgulara y\u00f6nelik, ilk bak\u0131\u015fta yan\u0131lg\u0131 oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k ve belirgin olup, her nas\u0131lsa inceleme s\u0131ras\u0131nda g\u00f6zden ka\u00e7m\u0131\u015f ve bu t\u00fcr bir yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin kamu d\u00fczeni ve vicdan\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden savunulmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n sonucunu b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde etkileyen ve \u00e7o\u011fu kez tersine \u00e7eviren ve d\u00fczeltilmesinin zorunlu oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k yan\u0131lg\u0131lard\u0131r.<\/strong> Uygulamada zaman zaman g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi, Yarg\u0131tay denetimi s\u0131ras\u0131nda da, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusuna ili\u015fkin maddi olgularda, davan\u0131n taraflar\u0131nda, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k s\u00fcrecinde, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa esas ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 ve bitim tarihlerinde, zarar hesaplar\u0131na ait rakam ve olgularda ve bunlara benzer durumlarda; yanl\u0131\u015f alg\u0131lama sonucu, a\u00e7\u0131k ve belirgin yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131klar yap\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Bu t\u00fcr a\u00e7\u0131k hatalarda \u0131srarla maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilmesi, <strong>yarg\u0131ya duyulan g\u00fcven ve sayg\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131, adalete olan inanc\u0131 sarsacakt\u0131r.<\/strong> O nedenledir ki; Yarg\u0131tay, bug\u00fcne de\u011fin maddi hatan\u0131n belirlendi\u011fi durumlarda soruna m\u00fcdahale etmi\u015f; ba\u015ftan yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131k maddi yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesini kabul etmi\u015ftir. HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 13.03.2013 tarihli ve 2013\/5-10 E., 2013\/548 K., 13.04.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/9-72 E., 2011\/99 K., 13.04.2011 tarihli ve 2011\/9-101 E., 2011\/128 K., 19.06.2015 tarihli ve 2013\/21-2361 E., 2015\/1728 K., 23.10.2002 tarihli ve 2002\/10-895 E., 2002\/838 K., 02.07.2003 tarihli ve 2003\/21-425 E., 2003\/441 K., 29.11.1995 tarihli ve 1995\/19-819 E., 1995\/1028 K., 24.05.1995 tarihli ve 1995\/9-348 E., 1995\/556 K., 14.03.1986 tarihli ve 1984\/2-714 E., 1986\/246 K. ve 15.10.1986 tarihli ve 1986\/6-491 E., 1986\/876 K. ile 10.06.1983 tarihli ve 1981\/10-323 E., 1983\/652 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da maddi hataya dayal\u0131 onama ve bozma kararlar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 taraf lehine sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 benimsenmi\u015ftir. Bu husus 30.11.1988 tarihli ve 1988\/2-776 E., 1988\/985 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda &#8220;&#8230;Yarg\u0131tay bozma il\u00e2m\u0131na uyulmakla meydana gelen usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131 usul hukukunun ana esaslar\u0131ndan olmakla ve Yarg\u0131tayca titizlikle g\u00f6zetilmekle birlikte bu kural\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k bir maddi hata h\u00e2linde dahi kat\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde uygulanmas\u0131 baz\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131nda adalet duygusuyla, maddi olgularla ba\u011fda\u015fmaz bulunmu\u015f ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla giderek uygulamada uyulan bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hukuki de\u011ferlendirme veya delil takdiri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda maddi bir hataya dayanmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 esas\u0131 benimsenmi\u015ftir&#8230;&#8221; \u015feklinde ifadesini bulmu\u015ftur. <strong>Ne var ki bozma karar\u0131nda hukuki y\u00f6nden bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131larak delil de\u011ferlendirmesi sonucunda bir sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise, bu karar\u0131n yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu ya da delillerin yanl\u0131\u015f de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fi sonradan anla\u015f\u0131lsa bile bozmaya uyulmas\u0131 ile olu\u015fan kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong> Bu durum HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 30.11.1988 tarihli ve 1988\/2-776 E., 1988\/985 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda maddi hataya dayanan bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 ile usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131na vurgu yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra karar\u0131n devam\u0131nda &#8220;&#8230;Burada \u015fu husus belirtilmelidir ki, <strong>bozma karar\u0131nda hukuki y\u00f6nden bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve delillerle belirli bir do\u011frultuda de\u011ferlendirilerek bir bozma karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f ise, bu bozmaya uyulmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, <span style=\"color: #993300;\">bozma yapan Daire hukuki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f de\u011fi\u015ftirse veya delil de\u011ferlendirmesinin yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu sonradan benimsese dahi<\/span> burada maddi hatadan s\u00f6z edilemeyece\u011finden usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n do\u011fdu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir.<\/strong> Ancak, Yarg\u0131tay Dairesinin vard\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7 her t\u00fcrl\u00fc de\u011fer yarg\u0131s\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda <strong>hi\u00e7 bir suretle ba\u015fka bi\u00e7imde yorumlanmayacak tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z bir maddi hataya dayan\u0131yorsa<\/strong> ve onunla s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131 ise o takdirde usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131 hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayacakt\u0131r&#8230;&#8221; \u015feklinde ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ayn\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f HGK&#8217;n\u0131n 20.01.1988 tarihli ve 1988\/1-249 E., 1988\/28 K., 20.12.1989 tarihli ve 1989\/12-539 E., 1989\/662 K., 15.12.1990 tarihli ve 1990\/1-450 E., 1990\/608 K., 09.03.1994 tarihli ve 1993\/17-889 E., 1994\/123 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da aynen s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Mahkemece \u00d6zel Dairenin bu karar\u0131na uyulmakla daval\u0131 lehine usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fmu\u015f olup, usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n kamu d\u00fczenine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu da tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. O h\u00e2lde bu a\u015famadan sonra i<strong>ddian\u0131n niteli\u011fi ve ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f bi\u00e7imine g\u00f6re<\/strong> taraflar aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkinin inan\u00e7l\u0131 i\u015flemden (teminat mukabili temlik) de\u011fil, hileden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131, hile hukuksal nedeni y\u00f6n\u00fcnden BK\u2019nun 31. maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc de g\u00f6zetilerek ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esi ile karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131, daval\u0131 lehine birinci bozmaya uyulmakla olu\u015fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n ihlali niteli\u011findedir. Hukuk Genel Kurulunda yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda maddi hataya dayanan birinci bozma karar\u0131na uyulmas\u0131 ile daval\u0131 lehine kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de, bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan benimsenmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/497<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/193<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tarih : 02.03.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>&#8221;&#8230;Bu a\u015famada usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kurumunun istisnalar\u0131ndan da bahsetmek gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">I- Mahkemenin g\u00f6revi ile ilgili usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan s\u00f6z edilemez. \u015e\u00f6yle ki; Yarg\u0131tay yerel mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131, g\u00f6rev itiraz\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n g\u00f6rev d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir sebeple bozar ve mahkeme bu karara uyarsa bozma d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan g\u00f6rev hususu usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturmayacak, yeniden yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada mahkeme taraflar\u0131n itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine ya da kendili\u011finden g\u00f6revsizlik karar\u0131 verebilecektir. Ancak temyizde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6rev itiraz\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ve bu husus Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan nazara al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131k ya da z\u0131mn\u00ee olarak reddedilmi\u015f ise bu takdirde usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak g\u00f6rev konusunda da olu\u015facak ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yapan mahkeme g\u00f6rev konusunda karar veremeyecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">II- Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yeni bir i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 da usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131d\u0131r. Az yukar\u0131da bahsedilen 09.05.1960 tarihli i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131na g\u00f6re, i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme kararlar\u0131 usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ra\u011fmen g\u00f6r\u00fclmekte olan davalara da uygulan\u0131r. \u0130lk derece mahkemesi usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa bile yeni i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131na g\u00f6re karar verecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">III- Karar hen\u00fcz kesinle\u015fmeden ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olarak \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc de usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturur. B\u00f6yle bir halde de usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa da yeni \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ve ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olan kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn uygulanmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">IV- Bir kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc Anayasa Mahkemesince iptal edilirse iptal edilen kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsa bile uygulanacak \u00f6ncelik usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakta de\u011fil Anayasa Mahkemesinin iptal karar\u0131nda olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">V- Usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n bir di\u011fer istisnas\u0131 ise kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr. Bozmadan sonra usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ile kesin h\u00fck\u00fcm \u00e7eli\u015fiyorsa \u00f6ncelik usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak da de\u011fil, kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan ve dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak re&#8217;sen nazara al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmdedir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">VI- Kamu d\u00fczenine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k da usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnalar\u0131ndan bir di\u011feridir. Ger\u00e7ekten de kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan bir husus ile usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak \u00e7eli\u015fiyorsa bu halde kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lan h\u00e2l usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ecektir. Hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre kamu d\u00fczeninden say\u0131lmakla hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc s\u00fcre s\u00f6z konusu ise usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haktan bahsedilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">VII- Nihayet son olarak; Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n karar\u0131 <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>her t\u00fcrl\u00fc yorumun, hukuki de\u011ferlendirme veya delil takdiri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ve tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z \u015fekilde ba\u015fka bir \u015fekilde yorumlanamayacak a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131kta<\/strong><\/span> <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>maddi hataya dayal\u0131 ise<\/strong> <\/span>ve onunla s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu halde usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak ilkesi uygulanmayacakt\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan dosya kapsam\u0131na uygun olmayacak \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131k ve tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z bir maddi hata yap\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde, bu hata, usul\u00fc kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r&#8230;.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Esas : 2017\/704<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Karar : 2021\/303<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tarih : 18.03.20213<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8230;&#8221;Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131na uyulmakla meydana gelen usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131, usul hukukunun ana esaslar\u0131ndan olmakla ve Yarg\u0131tayca titizlikle g\u00f6zetilmekle birlikte bu kural\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k bir maddi hata h\u00e2linde dahi kat\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde uygulanmas\u0131 baz\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131nda adalet duygusuyla, maddi olgularla ba\u011fda\u015fmaz bulunmu\u015f ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla giderek uygulamada uyulan <strong>bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hukuki de\u011ferlendirme veya delil takdiri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda<\/strong> maddi bir hataya dayanmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kural\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7 do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 esas\u0131 benimsenmi\u015ftir. Nitekim ayn\u0131 hususlara Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 07.12.2017 tarihli ve 2017\/1-1278 E., 2017\/1576 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da de\u011finilmi\u015ftir. Maddi hataya dayal\u0131 bozma karar\u0131na uyulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilebilmesi i\u00e7in Yarg\u0131tay Dairesinin <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>bozma karar\u0131nda her t\u00fcrl\u00fc yorum, de\u011fer yarg\u0131s\u0131, hukuki de\u011ferlendirme veya delil takdirinin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir suretle ba\u015fka bi\u00e7imde yorumlanamayacak, tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir maddi hata olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/strong><\/span> Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan dosya kapsam\u0131na uygun olmayacak \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131k ve tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z bir maddi hata yap\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, bu hata usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r&#8230;.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YED\u0130NC\u0130 HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Esas : 2025\/312<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Karar : 2025\/4137<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tarih : 07.10.2025<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun &#8220;Kesin S\u00fcre&#8221; ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 94. maddesi &#8220;Kanunun belirledi\u011fi s\u00fcreler kesindir. H\u00e2kim, tayin etti\u011fi s\u00fcrenin kesin oldu\u011funa karar verebilir. Bu takdirde h\u00e2kim, tayin etti\u011fi kesin s\u00fcreye konu olan i\u015flemi hi\u00e7bir duraksamaya yer vermeyecek \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klar ve s\u00fcreye uyulmamas\u0131n\u0131n hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irerek ihtar eder. Kesin oldu\u011fu belirtilmeyen s\u00fcreyi ge\u00e7irmi\u015f olan taraf yeniden s\u00fcre isteyebilir; bu \u015fekilde verilecek ikinci s\u00fcre kesindir ve yeniden s\u00fcre verilemez. <strong>Kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015flemi, s\u00fcresinde yapmayan taraf\u0131n, o i\u015flemi yapma hakk\u0131 ortadan kalkar.<\/strong> &#8221; \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Medeni yarg\u0131lama hukukunda dava a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131p karar verilinceye kadar, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n taraflar\u0131nca yap\u0131lacak belli usul i\u015flemlerinin belli bir zaman aral\u0131\u011f\u0131nda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereklidir. Medeni usul hukukunda s\u00fcreler genel olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n gecikmesini \u00f6nlemek i\u00e7in bulunmaktad\u0131r. H\u00e2kim, tarafa kesin s\u00fcre verirken bu s\u00fcrenin ara kararda belirtilen ve taraftan yapmas\u0131 beklenen i\u015fler i\u00e7in yeterli olmas\u0131na dikkat etmelidir. <strong>H\u00e2kim, kesin s\u00fcrenin miktar\u0131n\u0131 belirlerken ne gere\u011finden az belirlemeli ne de gere\u011finden fazla belirlemelidir.<\/strong> Zira gere\u011finden az verilen bir s\u00fcre taraf\u0131n hak kayb\u0131na u\u011framas\u0131na; gere\u011finden fazla verilen s\u00fcre yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzamas\u0131na neden olabilir <em>(Hakan Pekcan\u0131tez vd., Medeni Usul Hukuku, Cilt I, \u0130stanbul, 2017, s. 461).<\/em> H\u00e2kim kesin s\u00fcrenin miktar\u0131n\u0131 belirlerken takdir yetkisini haizdir. Genel olarak kanun koyucu somut olay adaletini sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla h\u00e2kime takdir yetkisi tan\u0131maktad\u0131r. H\u00e2kim takdir yetkisini kullanarak kesin s\u00fcrenin miktar\u0131n\u0131 belirlerken, her somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fini, taraflar\u0131n durumunu, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n amac\u0131n\u0131, objektif hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle medeni usul hukukuna h\u00e2kim olan ilkeleri dikkate almal\u0131d\u0131r. Medeni usul hukukumuzda kesin s\u00fcrenin taraf i\u00e7in yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131, Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 94. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re, kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015flemi, s\u00fcresinde yapmayan taraf\u0131n, o i\u015flemi yapma hakk\u0131 ortadan kalkar. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle kesin s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde yerine getirilmeyen i\u015flemin, bu s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra yap\u0131lmas\u0131na kural olarak imk\u00e2n yoktur. <span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>H\u00e2kimin tarafa kesin s\u00fcre vermesi halinde kar\u015f\u0131 taraf lehine usuli m\u00fcktesep hak do\u011faca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmektedir.<\/strong><\/span> Bu anlamda <strong>h\u00e2kim, karar\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fmas\u0131n\u0131 engelleyecek yeni bir karar veremez<\/strong> <em>(Volkan \u00d6z\u00e7elik, Medeni Usul Hukukunda H\u00e2kimin Verdi\u011fi Kesin S\u00fcre, T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi Dergisi, 2017 Say\u0131: 129, s.154 vd.).<\/em> Kesin s\u00fcrenin hak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc ve kamu d\u00fczeninden olmas\u0131 nedenleriyle, mahkeme ara karar\u0131n gere\u011finin yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 re\u2019sen incelemelidir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>YARGITAY<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>HUKUK GENEL KURULU<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Esas : 2023\/494<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Karar : 2025\/124<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Tarih : 12.03.2025<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8221;Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere \u0131slah, taraflardan birinin usule ili\u015fkin bir i\u015flemini, bir defaya mahsus olmak \u00fczere k\u0131smen veya tamamen d\u00fczeltmesine olanak tan\u0131yan ve kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n onay\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmeyen bir yoldur. T\u00fcrk Hukuk L\u00fbgat\u0131nda da; \u0130ddian\u0131n ve savunman\u0131n geni\u015fletilmesi veya de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n istisnas\u0131 olan \u0131slah, taraflardan her birinin, davada yapm\u0131\u015f olduklar\u0131 usul i\u015flemlerini bir defaya \u00f6zg\u00fc olmak \u00fczere, k\u0131smen ya da tamamen de\u011fi\u015ftirmesi ya da d\u00fczeltmesi \u015feklinde ifade edilmi\u015ftir <em>(T\u00fcrk Hukuk L\u00fbgat\u0131, T\u00fcrk Hukuk Kurumu, Cilt I, Ankara 2021, s. 515).<\/em> Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 176\/1. maddesinde taraflardan her birinin yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu usul i\u015flemlerini k\u0131smen veya tamamen \u0131slah edebilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f; ayn\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 177\/1. maddesinde ise, Islah, tahkikat\u0131n sona ermesine kadar yap\u0131labilir h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re tahkikat a\u015famas\u0131 devam etti\u011fi s\u00fcrece \u0131slah\u0131n yap\u0131labilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olup, tahkikat\u0131n baz\u0131 durumlarda bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra da yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zarureti bulundu\u011fundan tahkikat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken durumlarda bozmadan sonra da \u0131slah\u0131n yap\u0131labilece\u011fi kabul edilmelidir. Ne var ki; Kanun&#8217;un bu a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fcne ra\u011fmen bu Kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcnden \u00f6nce y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan m\u00fclga HUMK zaman\u0131nda verilmi\u015f olan 04.02.1948 tarihli ve 1944\/10 Esas, 1948\/3 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda (\u0130BK) yap\u0131lan bir yoruma dayan\u0131larak Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulduktan sonra \u0131slah yoluna ba\u015fvurulamayaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulunun 06.05.2016 tarihli ve 2015\/1 Esas, 2016\/1 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da, 04.02.1948 tarihli ve 1944\/10 Esas, 1948\/3 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131ndaki benzer gerek\u00e7eyle bozma karar\u0131 sonras\u0131 \u0131slah yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ve i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesinin gerekmedi\u011fine karar verilmi\u015ftir. 2797 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Kanunu&#8217;nun 45 inci maddesi uyar\u0131nca i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n benzer hukuki konularda Yarg\u0131tay Genel Kurullar\u0131n\u0131, dairelerini ve adliye mahkemelerini ba\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ancak Kanun ile y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckten kald\u0131r\u0131lan bir uygulaman\u0131n ancak Kanun ile geri getirilmesi s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131 da olsa bir kararla Kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bertaraf edilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Nitekim Kanun Koyucu da 06.05.2016 tarihli ve 2015\/1 Esas, 2016\/1 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n kanunla \u00e7at\u0131\u015fan yorumuna kay\u0131ts\u0131z kalmam\u0131\u015f, 22.07.2020 tarihli ve 7251 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 18. maddesiyle HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 177. maddesine eklenen ikinci f\u0131krada; Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n bozma karar\u0131ndan veya b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin kald\u0131rma karar\u0131ndan sonra dosya ilk derece mahkemesine g\u00f6nderildi\u011finde, ilk derece mahkemesinin tahkikata ili\u015fkin bir i\u015flem yapmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde tahkikat sona erinceye kadar da \u0131slah yap\u0131labilir. Ancak bozma karar\u0131na uymakla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan hukuki durum ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lamaz h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm gere\u011fince hem 1948 tarihli hem de 2016 tarihli i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131ndaki yorumlar kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemeyecektir. Di\u011fer taraftan az yukar\u0131da da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere sonradan ayn\u0131 hususta bir kanun \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 usul\u00ee kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnas\u0131 olup, usule ili\u015fkin kanun de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin ge\u00e7mi\u015fe etkili olarak uygulanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir, mahkemece verilen nihai karardan sonra de\u011fi\u015fiklik yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olsa dahi bu de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fin uygulanmas\u0131nda zorunluluk bulundu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bu durumda bozmadan sonra \u0131slah yap\u0131labilece\u011finden davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan \u00d6zel Dairenin birinci bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra dosyaya sunulan \u0131slah dilek\u00e7esine de\u011fer verilerek \u0131slah\u0131n ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu kabul edilmelidir. Gelinen a\u015famada zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 konusuna k\u0131saca de\u011finecek olursak; \u00d6zel Hukukta teknik bir kavram olan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 genel olarak alacak hakk\u0131n\u0131n belli bir s\u00fcre kullan\u0131lmamas\u0131 y\u00fcz\u00fcnden, dava edilebilme niteli\u011finden yoksun kalmas\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmektedir. T\u00fcrk Hukuk L\u00fbgat\u0131nda da Yasan\u0131n belirledi\u011fi ko\u015fullar alt\u0131nda bir s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesi \u00fczerine bir hak kazanma ya da bir y\u00fck\u00fcmden kurtulma yolu olarak tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r <em>(T\u00fcrk Hukuk L\u00fbgat\u0131, T\u00fcrk Hukuk Kurumu, Cilt I, Ankara 2021, s. 1244).<\/em> Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n sonucu; alacak hakk\u0131na son verme de\u011fil, onu eksik bor\u00e7 h\u00e2line getirme olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na ili\u015fkin d\u00fczenlemelerin temelinde iddia edilen alaca\u011f\u0131n aradan uzun zaman ge\u00e7mi\u015f olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen kullan\u0131lmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bor\u00e7lunun olduk\u00e7a uzak ge\u00e7mi\u015fte kalan bir bor\u00e7tan do\u011fabilecek ihtil\u00e2flara kar\u015f\u0131 korunmas\u0131, kendi alaca\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 uzun s\u00fcre kay\u0131ts\u0131z kalan kimsenin bu hakk\u0131n\u0131n art\u0131k korunmaya lay\u0131k olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmi\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131 yatmaktad\u0131r. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frayan alaca\u011f\u0131n tahsili hususunda devlet kendi g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fc kullanmaktan vazge\u00e7mekte, b\u00f6ylece s\u00f6z konusu alaca\u011f\u0131n \u00f6denip \u00f6denmemesi keyfiyeti bor\u00e7lunun iradesine b\u0131rak\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u015eu h\u00e2lde zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frayan alacak ortadan kalkmamakla beraber art\u0131k do\u011fal bir bor\u00e7 (Obligatio naturalis) h\u00e2line gelmektedir. Ancak belirtmek gerekir ki, alaca\u011f\u0131n salt zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, onun eksik bir borca d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fmesi i\u00e7in yeterli olmay\u0131p bor\u00e7lunun kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan alacak davas\u0131nda alacakl\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik bir def&#8217;i de bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n istikrar kazanm\u0131\u015f uygulamalar\u0131na g\u00f6re zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131, hukuki niteli\u011fi itibariyle maddi hukuktan kaynaklanan bir def&#8217;i olup usul hukuku anlam\u0131nda ise bir savunma arac\u0131d\u0131r. Ayn\u0131 hususlar Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 04.03.2021 tarihli ve 2020\/(21)-10-196 Esas, 2021\/195 Karar; 24.06.2021 tarihli ve 2017\/(23)15-3136 Esas, 2021\/842 Karar; 02.11.2022 tarihli ve 2020\/(15)6-609 Esas, 2022\/1424 Karar; 06.03.2024 tarihli ve 2023\/6-71 Esas, 2024\/156 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da aynen benimsenmi\u015ftir. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; eldeki davada davac\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme s\u00fcresinin uzamas\u0131 nedeniyle il\u00e2ve \u015fantiye gideri alaca\u011f\u0131yla ilgili istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresi Adana 2. Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesinin 2013\/134 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda verilen karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fti\u011fi 02.07.2020 tarihinden itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flayacakt\u0131r. Kamu ihalelerine girmekten yasaklanma nedeniyle olu\u015fan kazan\u00e7 kayb\u0131 ve \u015firket zarar\u0131n\u0131n tahsili istemi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ise zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak \u00d6zel Dairenin birinci bozma karar\u0131nda belirlenen Adana 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinin 2013\/1335 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davada karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi 27.05.2014 tarihinin <strong>maddi hata oldu\u011fu ve usul\u00ee m\u00fcktesep hak olu\u015fturmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong> dikkate al\u0131narak idare mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fti\u011fi 22.07.2020 tarihinin esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu durumda \u00d6zel Dairenin <strong>birinci bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yap\u0131lan \u0131slaha de\u011fer verilerek her iki talep y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davac\u0131n\u0131n \u0131slahla artt\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 miktarlar\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011framad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fka bir anlat\u0131mla \u0131slahla artt\u0131r\u0131lan talepler bak\u0131m\u0131ndan zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin dolmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir.<\/strong> Hukuk Genel Kurulunda yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler s\u0131ras\u0131nda; Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulunun 04.02.1948 tarihli ve 1944\/10 Esas, 1948\/3 Karar ile Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulunun 06.05.2016 tarihli ve 2015\/1 Esas, 2016\/1 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bozmadan sonra \u0131slah yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bozmadan sonra \u0131slah yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u00e7tihad\u0131 birle\u015ftirme karar\u0131n\u0131n 7251 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile HMK\u2019n\u0131n 177. maddesinde yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fin y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi 28.07.2020 tarihine kadar ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu ve 2797 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Kanunu&#8217;nun 45. maddesinin be\u015finci f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince t\u00fcm mahkemeleri ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte oldu\u011fu, \u00f6te yandan 7251 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile bozmadan sonra da \u0131slah yap\u0131labilece\u011fine ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcm getirilmi\u015f ise de bu Kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn kanunlar\u0131n geriye y\u00fcr\u00fcmezli\u011fi ilkesi ve \u0131slah i\u015fleminin yap\u0131lmakla tamamlanm\u0131\u015f usul\u00ee i\u015flem te\u015fkil etmesi nedeniyle eldeki davada \u0131slah tarihi itibariyle uygulanamayaca\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle \u00d6zel Dairenin birinci bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra 21.10.2019 tarihinde yap\u0131lan \u0131slah ge\u00e7ersiz oldu\u011fundan an\u0131lan \u0131slah dilek\u00e7esine de\u011fer verilemeyece\u011fi belirtilerek direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fi\u015fik gerek\u00e7eyle bozulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ile somut olayda mahkemece davac\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fme s\u00fcresinin uzamas\u0131 nedeniyle il\u00e2ve \u015fantiye gideri alaca\u011f\u0131yla ilgili istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshedildi\u011fi ve alaca\u011f\u0131n muaccel oldu\u011fu 27.10.2009 tarihinden itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131, ihale yasa\u011f\u0131ndan kaynakl\u0131 tazminat istemi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ise zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak yasakl\u0131l\u0131k i\u015fleminin iptaline dair Adana 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinin 2013\/1335 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davada karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi 27.05.2014 tarihinin esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, zira mahkemece \u00d6zel Dairenin birinci bozma karar\u0131na uyulmakla bu talep y\u00f6n\u00fcnden zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olarak kabul edilen 27.05.2014 tarihinin usul\u00ee m\u00fcktesep hak olu\u015fturdu\u011fu, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla her iki talep a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u0131slahla artt\u0131r\u0131lan k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru olup onanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de, <strong>bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle Kurul \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan benimsenmemi\u015ftir.&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>YARGITAY <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>ALTINCI HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Esas: 2024\/3534 <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong>Karar: 2025\/15<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><strong> Tarih: 13.01.2025<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong> &#8221;MUNZAM ZARAR BORCUN ZAMANINDA \u00d6DENMEMES\u0130 ENFLASYON SEBEB\u0130YLE U\u011eRANILAN TEMERR\u00dcD\u00dc A\u015eAN MUNZAM ZARARIN TALEB\u0130 BONODAN KAYNAKLANAN ALACA\u011eIN VADES\u0130NDE \u00d6DENMEMES\u0130 A\u015eKIN ZARAR (MUNZAM ZARAR) ALACA\u011eININ TAHS\u0130L\u0130 \u0130STEM\u0130 ZARARIN \u0130SPATI;<\/strong> &#8216;A\u015fk\u0131n Zarar (Munzam Zarar): Para bor\u00e7lar\u0131nda bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fcn bir sonucu niteli\u011findeki munzam (a\u015fk\u0131n) zarar TBK. m. 122 (B.K.105) h\u00fckm\u00fcnde d\u00fczenlenmektedir. S\u00f6z konusu h\u00fckm\u00fcn ilk f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re, &#8220;Alacakl\u0131, temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan bir zarara u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olursa, bor\u00e7lu kendisinin hi\u00e7bir kusuru bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmedik\u00e7e, bu zarar\u0131 da gidermekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr&#8221;. Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu&#8217;nun 10.11.1999 tarihli ve 1998\/13-353 E. 1999\/929K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere munzam zarar, sorumlulu\u011fu kusura dayanan bor\u00e7lu temerr\u00fcd\u00fcn\u00fcn hukuk\u00ee bir sonucudur ve alacakl\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131n\u0131n faizi a\u015fan b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcd\u00fcr. Munzam zarar, bor\u00e7lu temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fmeden borcunu \u00f6demi\u015f olsayd\u0131, alacakl\u0131n\u0131n mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kazanaca\u011f\u0131 durum ile temerr\u00fct sonucunda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan ve olu\u015fan durum aras\u0131ndaki farkt\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan ve kusur sorumlulu\u011fu kurallar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 bir zarar \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>MUNZAM ZARARIN TAZM\u0130N\u0130N\u0130N \u015eARTLARI:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yukar\u0131da anlat\u0131lanlardan anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, alacakl\u0131 temerr\u00fct faizini isteme hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan avantajl\u0131 bir konuma sahiptir. Oysa, ayn\u0131 durum munzam zarar\u0131n tazminini isteme hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir. Alacakl\u0131, ancak a\u015fa\u011f\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan \u015fartlar\u0131n bir arada bulunmas\u0131 halinde bor\u00e7ludan munzam zarar\u0131n tazminini isteyebilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A. Bir Para Borcunun Bulunmas\u0131<br \/>\nMunzam zarar\u0131n tazmininin istenebilmesi i\u00e7in borcun bir para borcu olmas\u0131 gerekir. Zira, munzam zarar\u0131n istenmesi her t\u00fcrl\u00fc bor\u00e7 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan de\u011fil, sadece para bor\u00e7lar\u0131 i\u00e7in m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Para borcunun kayna\u011f\u0131 ise \u00f6nemli de\u011fildir;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Munzam zarar\u0131n tazmini sadece t\u00fcketim \u00f6d\u00fcnc\u00fc s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine m\u00fcnhas\u0131r de\u011fildir. Mesel\u00e2, s\u00f6zle\u015fme, haks\u0131z fiil, sebepsiz zenginle\u015fme veya vek\u00e2letsiz i\u015fg\u00f6rmeden do\u011fan para borcunda munzam zarar\u0131n tazmini s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. Bunun i\u00e7in her \u015feyden \u00f6nce bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">B.Bor\u00e7lunun Temerr\u00fcd\u00fc<br \/>\nT\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu 117. maddesi uyar\u0131nca daval\u0131 bor\u00e7lunun usul\u00fcne uygun olarak temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmesi gerekir. Bor\u00e7lu temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmemi\u015fse bor\u00e7lu hakk\u0131nda yap\u0131lan icra takip tarihinde veya dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa dava tarihinde bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fc olu\u015fur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">C. Munzam Zarar<br \/>\nMunzam zarar\u0131n tazmini i\u00e7in aranan \u015fartlardan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fcs\u00fc zarard\u0131r. Nitekim, bu \u015fart &#8220;temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan bir zarara u\u011fram\u0131\u015f olursa&#8221; ifadesi ile TBK. m. 122\/1 h\u00fckm\u00fcnde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmektedir. Ancak, s\u00f6z konusu h\u00fck\u00fcmde zarar\u0131n t\u00fcr\u00fc ve niteli\u011fi konusunda a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k yoktur. Bununla beraber munzam zarar da zarar teorisindeki genel esaslara uygun bi\u00e7imde anla\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. T\u00fcrk-\u0130svi\u00e7re Hukuku&#8217;nda zarar daha ziyade dar anlamda, yani madd\u00ee zarar\u0131 ifade etmek i\u00e7in kullan\u0131l\u0131r. Eksilmenin malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 halinde madd\u00ee zarardan bahsedilir. Malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndaki eksilme, alacakl\u0131n\u0131n, zarar veren davran\u0131\u015ftan sonra malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n mevcut hali ile bu olay meydana gelmeseydi g\u00f6sterece\u011fi hal aras\u0131ndaki fark\u0131 ifade eder. Bu tan\u0131m \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde munzam zarar da bir t\u00fcr madd\u00ee zarard\u0131r. Bu zarar gerek doktrinde gerekse Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda (m\u00fcspet) olumlu zarar olarak nitelendirilmektedir. Munzam zarardan s\u00f6z edebilmek i\u00e7in temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan bir zarar\u0131n meydana gelmesi gerekir. \u015eu halde, munzam zarar hesaplan\u0131rken, bundan temerr\u00fct faizinin \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Munzam zarar \u00e7e\u015fitli tarzlarda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kabilir. Alacakl\u0131, bor\u00e7lunun kendisine para borcunu \u00f6dememesi sonucunda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye olan borcunu ifa edemedi\u011fi i\u00e7in temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015f ve kendisinin ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 temerr\u00fct faizinden daha y\u00fcksek bir temerr\u00fct faizini \u00f6demek zorunda kalm\u0131\u015f olabilir. Alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 zaman\u0131nda tahsil edemeyen alacakl\u0131 \u015firket, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015fiye olan ve vadesi gelmi\u015f borcunu \u00f6demek i\u00e7in ihtiyac\u0131 olan krediyi 3. ki\u015filerden sa\u011flamas\u0131 nedeniyle malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda meydana gelen eksilmeden dolay\u0131 da munzam zarar\u0131 olu\u015fabilir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">D. Uygun \u0130lliyet Ba\u011f\u0131<br \/>\nMunzam zarar\u0131n tazmini i\u00e7in s\u00f6z konusu zararla bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fc aras\u0131nda uygun illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 aran\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re, alacakl\u0131n\u0131n temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan zarar\u0131 ile bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fc aras\u0131nda uygun illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u015eayet alacakl\u0131n\u0131n u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi zararla bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fc aras\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 yoksa bor\u00e7lu munzam zarardan sorumlu tutulamaz, Alacakl\u0131n\u0131n u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 munzam zarar objektif bir \u015fekilde genel hayat tecr\u00fcbelerine ve olaylar\u0131n normal ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6re bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n sonucu say\u0131labilirse bor\u00e7lu a\u015fk\u0131n zarardan sorumlu tutulur. Yani, bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcd\u00fc b\u00f6yle bir zarara yol a\u00e7maya elveri\u015fli olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Aksi takdirde, alacakl\u0131 munzam zarar\u0131n tazminini isteyemez. Genel esas, burada da ge\u00e7erlidir. Bu itibarla, munzam zarar ile fiil aras\u0131ndaki uygun illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n var oldu\u011funu g\u00f6steren t\u00fcm olgular\u0131 ispatlamas\u0131 gereken taraf davac\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, alacakl\u0131 uygun illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funu ortaya koyan vak\u0131alar\u0131 ve bunlar\u0131n dayana\u011f\u0131 olan delilleri mahkemeye sunmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">E. Kusur<br \/>\nBor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fmesi veya temerr\u00fct faizi \u00f6demesi i\u00e7in kusur \u015fart de\u011fildir. Munzam zarar\u0131n tazmini ise temerr\u00fcd\u00fcn kusura ba\u011fl\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan biridir. Ger\u00e7ekten de, kusur, munzam zarar istemi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan mutlaka bulunmas\u0131 gereken bir unsurdur. TBK. m. 122\/1 gere\u011fince &#8220;bor\u00e7lu kendisinin hi\u00e7bir kusuru bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmedik\u00e7e&#8221; faizi a\u015fan zarar\u0131 da tazmin etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Kusurun derecesi ise sorumlulu\u011fun do\u011fmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nemli de\u011fildir; bor\u00e7lu her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kusurundan sorumludur. Bor\u00e7lu hafif ihmali sonucunda temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015f olsa bile temerr\u00fct sebebiyle do\u011fan ve faizle kar\u015f\u0131lanamayan munzam zarar\u0131 tazmin etmek zorunda kal\u0131r. TBK. m. 112 h\u00fckm\u00fcyle uyumlu olarak TBK. m. 122 h\u00fckm\u00fcnde de alacakl\u0131 yarar\u0131na bir kusur karinesi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re, alacakl\u0131 bor\u00e7lunun temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fmekte kusurlu oldu\u011funu ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc de\u011fildir; bor\u00e7lunun kusurlu oldu\u011fu varsay\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bor\u00e7lunun sorumluluktan kurtulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kendisinin hi\u00e7bir kusurunun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatlamas\u0131 gerekir. Bor\u00e7lu temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fmekte kusursuz oldu\u011funu \u00e7e\u015fitli \u015fekillerde ispatlayabilir. Mesel\u00e2, alacakl\u0131ya zaman\u0131nda ula\u015facak \u015fekilde g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi paran\u0131n kendi kusurundan kaynaklanmayan bir sebeple gecikti\u011fini ispatlayan bor\u00e7lu munzam zarar\u0131 tazmin y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden kurtulabilir. Ayn\u0131 esas, alaca\u011f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan haberdar olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bunda bir kusurunun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ya da \u00f6demeyi zaman\u0131nda yapmamas\u0131n\u0131n beklenilmeyen bir halden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatlayan bor\u00e7lu i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">MUNZAM ZARARIN \u0130SPATI:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Munzam zarar\u0131n hesaplanmas\u0131nda somut ve soyut y\u00f6ntemler dikkate al\u0131n\u0131r. Somut y\u00f6ntemde; davac\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n munzam zarar kaleminin olu\u015ftu\u011funu somut bir bi\u00e7imde ispatlamas\u0131 gerekir. \u00d6rne\u011fin borcunu zaman\u0131nda tahsil edememesi nedeniyle kredi bor\u00e7lanmas\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 veya 3. ki\u015filere borcunu zaman\u0131nda \u00f6deyememesi nedeniyle temerr\u00fcd faizi \u00f6dedi\u011fini, cezai \u015fart gibi \u00f6demelerde bulundu\u011funu, yine d\u00f6vizle yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bor\u00e7lanmadan dolay\u0131 borcunu zaman\u0131nda \u00f6deyememi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kur fark\u0131ndan kaynaklanan zarar\u0131 oldu\u011funu, \u00f6demekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc oldu\u011fu vergi, sosyal sigorta prim \u00f6demeleri gibi \u00f6demeleri zaman\u0131nda ifa edememesi nedeniyle gecikme faizi \u00f6demek zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia ederek bu zarar\u0131n\u0131 ispatlayabilir. Soyut y\u00f6ntemde; ya\u015fayan hayat\u0131n ger\u00e7ekleri ve deneyimlerinin zorunlu k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 herkes\u00e7e bilinen normal durumlar ile fiili karineler ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu&#8217;nun 6. maddesinde belirtilen genel kural\u0131n istisnalar\u0131 \u015feklinde ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fc ortadan kald\u0131ran olgular, ispat hukuku a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan alacakl\u0131 lehine de\u011ferlendirilir. \u00dclkemizde seyreden hiper enflasyon nedeniyle bireyin paras\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferini sabit tutmak ve kazan\u00e7 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in \u00e7aba ve giri\u015fimlerde bulunmak, \u00f6rne\u011fin en az\u0131ndan vadeli mevduat, alt\u0131n, devlet tahvili, d\u00f6viz gibi yat\u0131r\u0131mlarda de\u011ferlendirmesi olaylar\u0131n normal ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na, hayat tecr\u00fcbesine uygun bir karine olarak kabul edilmesi zorunludur. Enflasyonist ortamda ya\u015fayan normal makul bir insan\u0131n paras\u0131n\u0131 at\u0131l bir bi\u00e7imde tutmayaca\u011f\u0131, gelir getirecek bir yat\u0131r\u0131ma yat\u0131raca\u011f\u0131 bilinen bir ger\u00e7ektir. 818 say\u0131l\u0131 Bor\u00e7lar Kanun\u2019un 232 (TBK 187, madde de belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere herkes\u00e7e bilinen vak\u0131alarla ikrar edilmi\u015f vak\u0131alar \u00e7eki\u015fmeli say\u0131lmaz). Yasal deyimle bu maruf ve me\u015fhur vak\u0131alar\u0131n ispat\u0131na gerek yoktur.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Y\u00fcksek Enflasyon D\u00f6nemlerinde; S\u00fcrekli ve y\u00fcksek enflasyonun g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00fclke ekonomilerinde para borcunun zaman\u0131nda \u00f6denmemesi halinde alacakl\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7luyu temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmesi, borcun ifas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcre almas\u0131 nedeniyle alacakl\u0131 her zaman zarara u\u011frar. Bu zarar\u0131n baz\u0131 ispat kolayl\u0131klar\u0131 ile de olsa ispat edilmesi gerekir. Paran\u0131n de\u011fer kaybetmesi alacakl\u0131n\u0131n mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bir eksilmeye yol a\u00e7mas\u0131 halinde alacakl\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu kabul edilmelidir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Normal Enflasyon D\u00f6neminde; Normal enflasyon d\u00f6nemlerinde temerr\u00fctten sonra ifa an\u0131na kadar paran\u0131n de\u011fer kaybetmesi kural olarak zarar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6stermez. Enflasyon \u00fclke ekonomisinde s\u00fcreklilik ve y\u00fckseklik arz etmiyorsa bu durumda alacakl\u0131n\u0131n somut olaylarla zarar\u0131n\u0131 ispatlamas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">20.10.1989 g\u00fcn ve 1988\/4 esas 1989\/3 karar say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u00e7tihat\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulu karar\u0131nda \u201cpara her zaman kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ve temett\u00fc meta oldu\u011fundan ge\u00e7 \u00f6denmesi halinde zarar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kesindir.\u201d denilerek para borcunu \u00f6demekte geciken bor\u00e7lunun bu eyleminden dolay\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011faca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Anayasa Mahkemesi&#8217;nin bireysel ba\u015fvuru sonucunda vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu, 21.12.2017 g\u00fcn ve 2014\/2267 say\u0131l\u0131 ba\u015fvuru\u00a0no.lu karar\u0131na konu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta, ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n enflasyon kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde de\u011fer kayb\u0131na u\u011frat\u0131larak \u00f6dendi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucuya \u015fahsi ve ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir k\u00fclfet y\u00fcklendi\u011fi, bu tespite ra\u011fmen derece mahkemelerinin ba\u015fvurucunun zarara u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ayr\u0131ca ispatlamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki kat\u0131 yorumu nedeniyle somut olay bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kamu yarar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda kurulmas\u0131 gereken adil dengenin ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine de\u011ferlendirilip m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihl\u00e2l edildi\u011fine ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, hak ihl\u00e2line neden olmamak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle munzam zarar\u0131n somut delillerle kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi uygulamas\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7ilmi\u015f, geli\u015fen ekonomik ko\u015fullar, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 ile kamu yarar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki adil dengenin korunmas\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesi&#8217;nin ihl\u00e2l kararlar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutularak enflasyon ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak d\u00f6viz kurlar\u0131, mevduat faizleri, devlet tahvilleri ve di\u011fer yat\u0131r\u0131m ara\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n faiz oranlar\u0131 ile birlikte getirilerinin temerr\u00fct faizden fazla olmas\u0131 halinde munzam zarar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n karine olarak kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fi benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yine Anayasa Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 2017-24810 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 27.11. 2019 tarihli karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 ilkelere temas edilmi\u015ftir. Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 57031\/12 ba\u015fvuru\u00a0no.lu\u00a0Suna Denizci\/T\u00fcrkiye hakk\u0131nda verilen kararda da munzam zarar\u0131n talep edilebilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Yukar\u0131da belirtilen kararlar uyar\u0131nca ki\u015finin mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda meydana gelen azalman\u0131n m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihl\u00e2li niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu munzam zarar ispat\u0131 konusunda kat\u0131 ispat kurallar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 kal\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ihl\u00e2l kararlar\u0131 verildi\u011fi ve tazminata h\u00fckmedildi\u011fi yine y\u00fcksek enflasyonist d\u00f6nemlerde bor\u00e7lunun borcunu \u00f6demeyerek d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck temerr\u00fct faizinden yararlanarak haks\u0131z kazan\u00e7 elde etti\u011fi ve bor\u00e7lunun borcunu \u00f6dememesi, direngen durumda olmas\u0131 nedeniyle mahkemelerdeki dava say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n h\u0131zla artt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu nedenle y\u00fcksek enflasyonist d\u00f6nemde soyut y\u00f6ntemin dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 t\u00fcm bu sak\u0131ncalar\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131racak, adaletin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesini sa\u011flayacakt\u0131r. Her somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi de dikkate al\u0131narak bulunulacak zarar miktar\u0131n\u0131n TBK&#8217;nun 50 ve 51. maddeleri (m\u00fclga BK&#8217;n\u0131n 42 ve 43 md) kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilerek belirlenmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Munzam zarar\u0131n hesap y\u00f6nteminde dikkate al\u0131nacak ekonomik veriler;<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">1 . Her y\u0131l itibariyle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen TEFE- T\u00dcFE, oran\u0131<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">2. Bankalar\u0131n 3 ayl\u0131k ortalama vadeli mevduat faiz oranlar\u0131,<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">3. Devlet tahvillerine verilen faiz oranlar\u0131<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">4. D\u00f6viz kurlar\u0131ndaki Amerikan Dolar\u0131 ve Euro de\u011fi\u015fim oranlar\u0131<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">5. Asgari \u00fccret art\u0131\u015f\u0131<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">6. Alt\u0131n fiyatlar\u0131ndaki art\u0131\u015f<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Sepetteki bu verilerin ortalamas\u0131n\u0131n mahkemece zarar\u0131n hesaplanmas\u0131nda dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">ZAMANA\u015eIMI:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Munzam zarar\u0131n tazmini davas\u0131 818 say\u0131l\u0131 BK\u2019n\u0131n 125 ve T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu&#8217;nun 146. maddesi uyar\u0131nca<strong> 10 senelik zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresine tabidir. Zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihi ise alacakl\u0131n\u0131n alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n tahsil edildi\u011fi tarihtir.<\/strong> Somut olayda, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 kooperatifin \u00fcyesi oldu\u011fu, kooperatif\u00e7e kendisine tahsis edilen konutun daval\u0131n\u0131n borcundan dolay\u0131 sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan davac\u0131ya 28.08.2017 tanzim, 29.12.2017 vade tarihli senet verildi\u011fi, senedin vadesinde \u00f6denmedi\u011fi ve davac\u0131n\u0131n 08.02.2018 tarihinde icra takibine ge\u00e7ti\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n icra takip sonucu alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 24.07.2023 tarihinde tahsil etti\u011fi, temerr\u00fct tarihi olan 29.12.2017 tarihinden alaca\u011f\u0131n tahsil edildi\u011fi 24.07.2023 tarihine kadar \u00fclkemizdeki enflasyon oranlar\u0131, yabanc\u0131 paran\u0131n de\u011fer art\u0131\u015f\u0131, alt\u0131n fiyatlar\u0131n\u0131n art\u0131\u015f\u0131, vadeli mevduat faiz oranlar\u0131, devlet tahviline verilen faiz oran\u0131, asgari \u00fccret art\u0131\u015f\u0131 gibi ekonomik g\u00f6stergeler yine o d\u00f6nem i\u00e7erisindeki yasal faiz oranlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, davac\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n paras\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferini sabit tutmak ve kazan\u00e7 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in bir \u00e7abada bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na da uygun oldu\u011fu, en az\u0131ndan paran\u0131n de\u011fer kayb\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek i\u00e7in d\u00f6viz, alt\u0131n, vadeli mevduat hesab\u0131, devlet tahvili gibi yat\u0131r\u0131mlara y\u00f6nelmesinin do\u011fal oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lmakla, davac\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n temerr\u00fct faiz oran\u0131 \u00fczerinde a\u015fk\u0131n zarar\u0131 (munzam) olu\u015ftu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir. Mahkemece konusunda uzman bilirki\u015fi veya bilirki\u015fi kurulundan yukar\u0131da belirtilen ekonomik unsurlar dikkate al\u0131narak olu\u015fturulan sepet hesab\u0131na g\u00f6re davac\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n temerr\u00fct faizini a\u015fan bir zarara u\u011fray\u0131p u\u011framad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilerek, varsa bu zarar miktar\u0131ndan da davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan tahsil edilen temerr\u00fct faiz miktar\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131larak, davac\u0131n\u0131n munzam zarar miktar\u0131 bulunup davac\u0131 alacakl\u0131n\u0131n a\u015fk\u0131n zarar\u0131n\u0131n (Munzam) tahsiline karar verilmesi gerekirken, davac\u0131n\u0131n somut olarak zarar\u0131n\u0131 ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftuncayilcim.av.tr%2Fv5%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fictihat-2.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 500px;border: none;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10;\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading...<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ictihat-2.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ictihat-2.pdf\" download>Download <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftuncayilcim.av.tr%2Fv5%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fibgk-1945-20.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 500px;border: none;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10;\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading...<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ibgk-1945-20.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ibgk-1945-20.pdf\" download>Download <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftuncayilcim.av.tr%2Fv5%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Filovepdf_merged_merged-1.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 500px;border: none;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10;\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading...<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ilovepdf_merged_merged-1.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/ilovepdf_merged_merged-1.pdf\" download>Download <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftuncayilcim.av.tr%2Fv5%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2024-41763.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 500px;border: none;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10;\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading...<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024-41763.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024-41763.pdf\" download>Download <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>6098 Say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu F. S\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fi I. S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc MADDE 26- Taraflar, bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin i\u00e7eri\u011fini kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde \u00f6zg\u00fcrce belirleyebilirler. II. Kesin h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck<span class=\"excerpt-hellip\"> [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":234,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-haberler"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4258","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4258"}],"version-history":[{"count":104,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4258\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5842,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4258\/revisions\/5842"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/234"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}