T.R. SUPREME COURT
- Law Office
Basis: 2014/4788
Decision: 2014/12549
Decision Date: 06.05.2014
REQUEST FOR COLLECTION OF APPROPRIATE EASEMENT – EXCESS DETERMINATION OF EASEMENT RIGHT PRICE SHOULD BE RETURNED APPLICATION AND ATTORNEY CROSSES POSTED BY THE PLAYER SHOULD BE RETURNED – TERMINATION OF THE PROVISION
SUMMARY: Considering the nature, geometrical condition, surface area and route of the energy transmission line of the immovable in question, the rate of depreciation due to the easement right, the entire value of the immovable; According to the report, which determined a higher rate of depreciation without considering that it could not exceed (1) percent, it was not considered correct to determine the cost of the easement right more and not to think that the application and attorney crosses deposited by the plaintiff party should be returned. The judgment had to be overturned.
(4721 S. K. Art. 756)
Litigation and Decision: At the end of the proceedings for the collection of the pylon place price and the provision for the easement right of the immovable, over which the energy transmission line was passed by confiscating without expropriation between the parties, at the end of the trial: Examining the above-mentioned judgment on the acceptance of the case by the Supreme Court, petition given by the defendant administration attorney After the documents in the file were read and the conflict was understood, the need was discussed and considered:
The case is related to the request for the collection of the pylon place price and the provision for the easement right of the immovable, over which the power transmission line is passed, by confiscating without expropriation.
The court decided to accept the case, and the decision was appealed by the defendant’s attorney.
In the valuation of the immovable, which is the subject of the lawsuit, according to the income method, and in the decision to collect the pylon place price and the provision for the easement right, there was no inaccuracy in terms of method.
However;
1- Considering the nature, geometrical condition, surface area and route of the energy transmission line of the immovable subject to the lawsuit, the rate of decrease in value due to the easement right, the entire value of the immovable; Determination of the easement right price more than the report, which detects a higher rate of impairment, without considering that it cannot exceed (1) percent,
2- It is not thought that the application and power of attorney crosses deposited by the claimant should be returned,
It was not seen correctly.
Conclusion: Since the plaintiff’s attorney’s objections were valid, it was unanimously decided on 06.05.2014 that the verdict be overturned for the reasons explained, pursuant to Article 428 of the H.U.M.K. (¤¤)
Synergy Legislation and Case Law Program