EN SUPREME COURT
Legal Department
Mainstay: 2014/200
Verdict: 2014/12761
Decision Date: 02.07.2014
Dec PAY, REGISTRATION AND DAMAGES CLAIMS CASE – THE APPLICANT PAID DUE TO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SHOWN VALUE AND THE ACTUAL VALUE, AND THE POWER OF ATTORNEY FEE WILL NOT BE GIVEN TO THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY, AND THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF NON-PAYMENT OF THE FEE FOR THE PLAINTIFF
SUMMARY: Due to the difference between the shown value and the actual value of the immovables subject to the lawsuit, the cost of the lawsuit is on the grounds that it is unfair in the plaintiff’s case and will not require Decrees on the proxy fee in favor of the defendant, ………….. Accepted as TL and included in the scope of acceptance ………… The remaining TL after deducting ………… The defendant of TL is M. it is not right to be ruled with incomplete power of attorney in his favor.
(1136 SK Md. 166)
Lawsuit and Decision:
At the end of the title deed cancellation, registration and compensation case between the parties, against the decision of the local court regarding the partial acceptance of the case, defendant M. Dec. deputy, defendants K. and F. the file has been examined by filing an appeal by the attorney within the legal period; the report has been read, the explanations have been listened to, the issues deemed necessary have been discussed and a decision has been made;
The case relates to the request for cancellation and registration of the title deed based on the legal reason of abuse of power of attorney, if not, the claim for compensation. K. refusal due to abandonment due to lack of subject matter in favor of and therefore not adjudged a proxy fee; F . and M. the voluntary lawsuit for 1/3 of the apartment price filed against you, defendant M. to be rejected because of the lack of certainty in terms of the claims against him; Defendant M.there is no mistake in deciding on the partial acceptance of the title deed cancellation and registration case in terms of other apartments requested from . Defendant K.with all the objections of the defendant M .’s other appeals are not valid and rejected.
F.the rejection of the waiver request of , defendant F .it is understood he has waived his appeal.
However, the plaintiff’s attorney, the apartment price requested from the defendants and the reasoned petition as the sum of the amount of compensation is 1,000,000.-Since TL has been determined and the fee has been paid over this value, 20 parcels numbered 292, 1.000.000.-The subject of the lawsuit is immovable for a price of TL, 1,000,000.-The subject of the lawsuit was made over the TL price. A Block 25, A. The total cost of 53/71 shares of 98 Blocks, B Block 37 and B Block 32 parcels, the total cost of the independent section is 409.000,00.- Which is the cost of 1 apartment in TL and the total compensation cost of the real estate in 67.500 TL.00.-
The case cost of TL is 1.000.000,00.-It is necessary to be deducted from TL and the remaining amount should be decided on the power of attorney fee in favor of defendant M. If the value is shown to be high due to the difference between the shown value of the immovable property and its actual value in the petition, the plaintiff was proved wrong in his case, and the proxy Decried in favor of the defendant. The cost of the lawsuit is 494,500.00.-409.000, which was accepted as TL and included in the scope of acceptance.-It is not correct to deduct the TL and pay the remaining 85.000,00 TL.
Defendant M. the objection of the deputy in this regard is valid. With its adoption unanimously on 02.07.2014, for the reason explained (provisional 3 of the Law No. 6100. by sending the article) 428 of the HUMK No. 1086. in accordance with the article, it has been decided to annul the provision and return the advance payment to the plaintiff.