NOTE: In order for a residence complaint to be filed, it is not necessary for the debtor to live personally in the registered residence in his name, and even renting this place does not prevent him from making this request.NOTE: In order for adence comp residence complaint to be filed, it is not necessary for the debtor to live personally in the registered residence in his name, and even renting this place does not prevent him from making this request.
T.C.
SUPREME COURT
8th LAW DEPARTMENT
E. 2015/16312
K. 2017/15346
T. 15.11.2017
At the end of the trial held in the case between the parties, which is explained above, the Court decided to dismiss the case and upon the appeal of the plaintiff’s attorney, the file was examined by the Chamber and the necessary action was considered.
DECISION: The representative of the debtor, explaining that the seized real estate is the appropriate residence of the debtor, is 82/12 of the IIK. according to the article, he asked for a decision to be made to lift the seizure.SION: The representative of the debtor, DDECISION: The representative of the debtor, explaining that the seized real estate is the appropriate residence of the debtor, is 82/12 of the IIK. according to the article, he asked for a decision to be made to lift the seizure.
The court ruled that the debtor’s daughter …. is the owner of the disputed property..where the person lives as a tenant, this is the FIRST of the debtor’s residence claim.it has been decided to reject the complaint on the grounds that it does not fall within the scope of Article 82/1-12 of the nun. The judgment has been appealed by the debtor’s attorney.
IIK’s 82/12. according to the article, the debtor’s “appropriate” house cannot be foreclosed. Whether a residence is suitable for the debtor’s situation or not is determined according to the social status of the said person at the time of foreclosure and the needs of the debtor and his family. 82/12. according to the article, the debtor’s “appropriate” house cannot be foreclosed. Whether a residence is suitable for the debtor’s situation or not is determined according to the social status of the said person at the time of foreclosure and the needs of the debtor and his family. The term “family” here includes the people who live under the same roof as the debtor and who are his dependents. After the price required by the Enforcement Court for the debtor to provide a suitable residence that is mandatory for housing with the mentioned ones has been determined by experts, if the value of the seized place is more than this, it should be decided to sell it, and the amount required for the residence, the qualities of which are determined above the sale price, should be given to the debtor, the rest should be left in the enforcement file Jul.fter the price required by the Enforcement Court for the debtor to provide a suitable residence that is mandatory for housing with the mentioned ones has been determined by experts, if the value of the seized place is more than this, it should be decided to sell it, and the amount required for the residence, the qualities of which are determined above the sale price, should be given to the debtor, the rest should be left in the enforcement file Jul. Places of quality and housing that exceed these criteria, as well as places outside the dwelling that cover a room and hall that exceed reasonable dimensions and contain mandatory elements for residence, are contrary to the purpose provided for in the article. When making the evaluation, house prices in the most modest neighborhoods should be taken as a basis.
In the present case, the Court rejected your objection to the debtor’s non-attachability due to the presence of a tenant in the immovablehen making the evaluation, house prices in the most modest neighborhoods should be taken as a basis.
In the present case, the Court rejected your objection to the debtor’s non-attachability due to the presence of a tenant in the immovable property. IIK’s 82/12. When making the evaluation, house prices in the most modest neighborhoods should be taken as a basis.
In the present case, the Court rejected your objection to the debtor’s non-attachability due to the presence of a tenant in the immovable property. IIK’s 82/12. in order for a residence complaint to be filed in accordance with the article, it is not necessary for the debtor to personally reside in the registered residence in his name, and even renting this place does not prevent him from making this request.
In this case, in the light of the principles explained above, it is inappropriate for the Court to decide to reject the complaint on written grounds when the merits of the case should be examined.
RESULT: With the acceptance of the appeal objection of the debtor’s attorney, the Court’s decision is reversed for the reason explained above, in accordance with Article 366 of the EBL and Temporary Article 3 of the HMK No. 6100.ESULT: With the acceptance of the appeal objection of the debtor’s attorney, the Court’s decision is reversed for the reason explained abESULT: With the acceptance of the appeal objection of the debtor’s attorney, the Court’s decision is reversed for the reason explained above, in accordance with Article 366 of the EBL and Temporary Article 3 of the HMK No. 6100. article 428 of the HUMK No. 1086 by sending the article. in accordance wit
You can read our other articles and petition examples by clinking here.