19.Law Office 2014/6234 E., 2015/3062 K .
“legal text”
COURT : Commercial Court
At the end of the trial of the receivable case between the parties, a call sheet was sent to the concerned parties upon the appeal of the judgment given by the defendant’s attorney for the partial acceptance and partial rejection of the case for the reasons written in the Decriminalization Decision. On a certain day, the plaintiff vek.Hunt…. with the defendant vek.Hunt…. after hearing the oral statements of the lawyers present at the hearing and it became clear that the appeal petition was within its time limit, the file was reviewed, discussed and decisions were made on the issues deemed necessary.
Decision
Paying the plaintiff’s attorney, the defendant arranged between the parties Dec Decently agreed as of the date for the sale of the features of the 2011 model vehicle specified in the proforma invoice dated 02.01.2012 to the plaintiff for a price of 79.500,00, and between 04.01.2012-12.01.2012, a total of 79.500,00 TL was paid from the defendant, although the defendant did not deliver his vehicle, the notice was withdrawn and avoided delivery, thus, a client who suffered damage while delivering a vehicle to his client spent TL 2,950.00 renting a zero vehicle during this process (between Dec pays 15.01.2012-10.02.2012) and terminated the contract for just cause, reserving his rights to the excess part, while TL 79,500.00 and TL 2,950.00 car rental expenses were paid as the cost of the vehicle. In the case with a total amount of 82.450,00 TL, the defendant
he requested and sued for a decision to be made on his collection by his attorney. Paying paid excise duty on behalf of the plaintiff, the ownership was transferred to the plaintiff, the plaintiff applied for the registration of the vehicle by the branch office, justifying the legislation, the vehicle can also be registered as a 2011 model for registration as a 2010 model, the result of the dispute will be notified in correspondence with the relevant authorities, stating that this situation is a situation that develops completely outside of his client, he asked for the dismissal of the case.
According to the evidence collected by the court and the expert report, although the defendant has committed to sell and deliver the 2011 model vehicle, he wants to deliver the 2010 model vehicle to the plaintiff, therefore, due to the failure to fulfill the delivery debt in accordance with the contract, it was understood that the plaintiff’s request for termination of the contract was justified on the grounds of partial acceptance of the case, the cost of the vehicle was 79.500,00 TL, and he requested and sued for a decision on the collection of the defendant’s receivable.
Taking into account the articles contained in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, compelling reasons, there are no errors in the evaluation of the evidence, rejection of all appeals that were not seen on the spot of the defendant’s attorney, APPROVAL of the decision found in accordance with the procedure and the law, the attorney present at the Supreme Court hearing was appreciated in favor of the plaintiff 1.100,00,-TL. it was decided unanimously on 05.03.2015 that the trial proxy fee should be paid to the plaintiff by taking from the defendant and the approval fee written below should be taken from the defendant.