COMPLETION OF THE CADASTRE
Articles 11 and 12 of the Cadastre Law (KK) concern the publication and finalization of cadastral records.
According to Article 11 of the KK, “The cadastral director prepares the announcement tables based on the findings made according to the cadastral records; he/she announces these tables and map samples at the directorate and the village office for a period of thirty days; he/she states that those who have objections can file a lawsuit at the cadastral court within the announcement period. Cadastral fees are also indicated in this announcement.
The cadastral director must complete these procedures within three months at the latest from the date the cadastral team completes its fieldwork.”
According to Article 12 of the Cadastral Law, “After the thirty-day announcement period has passed, the delimitations and determinations in the cadastral records for which no lawsuit has been filed become final.
Records finalized and approved by the cadastral director and final decisions of the cadastral court shall be registered in the land registry within three months at the latest, and the date of finalization shall be indicated as the date of registration.
The rights, delimitations, and determinations specified in these minutes cannot be contested after ten years have passed from the date of finalization of the minutes, and no lawsuit can be filed based on legal grounds prior to the cadastre.”
According to this provision, if no lawsuit is filed within thirty days against the cadastral minutes obtained from the cadastral works, these minutes become final with the approval of the cadastral director. Finalized records are registered in the land registry within three months at the latest. After the records are finalized, those claiming to be the true rightful owners may file a lawsuit for the correction of the land registry, arguing that the registration is unlawful. However, according to Article 12 of the Cadastre Law, this lawsuit is subject to a statute of limitations. According to this provision, no objection may be made after ten years have passed from the date of finalization of the minutes regarding the rights, restrictions, and determinations specified in the minutes, and no lawsuit may be filed based on legal grounds prior to the cadastre.
This 10-year period is a statute of limitations. It must be taken into account ex officio by the judge. As it is a statute of limitations, it cannot be interrupted or suspended.
The Supreme Court’s decisions on this matter are as follows: “Article 12/3 of Law No. 3402 stipulates that claims based on legal grounds prior to cadastral registration cannot be asserted after ten years have passed from the date of finalization of the cadastral records.
The purpose of accepting limitation periods in Cadastral Laws is again to protect public order. Limitation periods restrict the freedom to seek justice for a certain period, not the right of ownership. Since these periods directly concern public order, they must be taken into account ex officio by the court, regardless of the stage of the case.
In the present case, the lawsuit was filed on May 21, 2001, and the plaintiffs relied on the inheritance waiver agreement dated 1970. The cadastral survey of the immovable properties was conducted in 1979, and the findings were finalized on July 7, 1982, and March 31, 1980. Considering all these explanations, it is understood that the plaintiff’s claim is based on legal grounds prior to the cadastral survey date.
Therefore, in accordance with the above explanations and the provisions of the law, since the 10-year statute of limitations period has passed between the date the cadastral survey became final and the date of the lawsuit, considering that the statute of limitations period can be taken into account at every stage of the lawsuit and that it is a matter of public order, and considering that the previous reversal decision did not give rise to acquired rights for the parties, the lawsuit should have been dismissed due to the statute of limitations. Therefore, the decision to accept the lawsuit in its written form is erroneous and requires reversal.
The court ruled in writing that the lawsuit was filed based on reasons prior to the determination and that the plaintiffs had acquired rights through inheritance. However, according to the provision of Article 12/3 of Law No. 3402, lawsuits of this nature can be filed within 10 years from the date the cadastral determination became final. In the present case, it is understood from the file that the cadastral survey was completed in 1987 for parcel no. 11 and in 1984 for parcel no. 12. In the present case, the lawsuit was filed on November 25, 2013, and it is clear that the 10-year period stipulated in the law had expired as of the date of the lawsuit.
Therefore, the lawsuit should have been dismissed due to the statute of limitations, but this was disregarded, and the court proceeded to the merits and decided to accept the lawsuit with written reasons. This is incorrect, and likewise, it is incorrect to issue a decision that does not allow for the cadastral survey to become final. It is enforced by not showing the shares that were canceled and decided to be registered and the shares for which the registration decision was made.
It is also not possible to file a lawsuit in cases where third parties are protected by the principle of reliance on the land registry (TMK m. 1023) or ordinary statute of limitations (TMK m. 712). In other words, the acquisition of real rights in good faith based on the land registry within a 10-year period is protected for fraudulently registered immovable properties.