{"id":10446,"date":"2020-12-07T10:27:26","date_gmt":"2020-12-07T10:27:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/?p=10446"},"modified":"2020-12-07T10:33:04","modified_gmt":"2020-12-07T10:33:04","slug":"kadina-ozgu-olmayan-takilarla-ilgili-son-hukuk-genel-kurul-karari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2020\/12\/07\/kadina-ozgu-olmayan-takilarla-ilgili-son-hukuk-genel-kurul-karari\/","title":{"rendered":"Kad\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fc olmayan tak\u0131larla ilgili son Hukuk Genel Kurul karar\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
T.C.<\/div>\n
YARGITAY<\/div>\n
Hukuk Genel Kurulu<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
ESAS NO : 2017\/3-1040<\/div>\n
KARAR NO : 2020\/240<\/div>\n
T \u00dc R K M \u0130 L L E T \u0130 A D I N A<\/div>\n
Y A R G I T A Y \u0130 L A M I<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\u0130NCELENEN KARARIN<\/div>\n
MAHKEMES\u0130 : Eski\u015fehir 1. Aile Mahkemesi<\/div>\n
TAR\u0130H\u0130 : 22\/10\/2015<\/div>\n
NUMARASI : 2015\/692-2015\/716<\/div>\n
DAVACI : Nergis vekili Av. Mehmet<\/div>\n
DAVALI : \u015eahin vekili Av. Hatice<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
1. Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki \u201calacak\u201d davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda, Eski\u015fehir 1. Aile Mahkemesince verilen davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n taraf vekilleri taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 3. Hukuk Dairesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonunda bozulmu\u015f, Mahkemece \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
2. Direnme karar\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
3. Hukuk Genel Kurulunca dosyadaki belgeler incelendikten sonra gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
I. YARGILAMA S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/div>\n
Davac\u0131 \u0130stemi:<\/div>\n
4. Davac\u0131 vekili 28.06.2013 tarihli dava dilek\u00e7esinde, taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fand\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde tak\u0131lan 18 adet bilezik, 1 adet k\u00fcpe, 2 adet y\u00fcz\u00fck, 11 adet k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck alt\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcvekkiline Sincan il\u00e7esinde al\u0131nan ev i\u00e7in kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etti\u011fini, alt\u0131nlar\u0131n daval\u0131dan talep edilmesine ra\u011fmen verilmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, fazlaya ili\u015fkin haklar\u0131 sakl\u0131 kalmak kayd\u0131 ile alt\u0131nlar\u0131n aynen, m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde bedelleri olan 20.000TL\u2019nin dava tarihinden i\u015fleyecek yasal faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmesini talep ve dava etmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
Daval\u0131 Cevab\u0131:<\/div>\n
5. Daval\u0131 vekili 11.11.2013 tarihli cevap dilek\u00e7esinde, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde 5 adeti m\u00fcvekkiline ait olmak \u00fczere toplam 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn ve ev e\u015fyas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131m\u0131na ili\u015fkin bor\u00e7lar, \u00e7ocuk edinmek i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan tedavi masraflar\u0131 ile ortak giderler i\u00e7in davac\u0131n\u0131n onay\u0131 ile kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ek durumu yans\u0131tmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunarak davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi Karar\u0131:<\/div>\n
6. Eski\u015fehir 1. Aile Mahkemesinin 11.03.2014 tarihli ve 2013\/495 E., 2014\/189 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile; Sincan il\u00e7esindeki evin, evlilikten 1-2 y\u0131l sonra al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, t\u00fcp bebek tedavisinin ise evlilikten 7-8 y\u0131l devam eden s\u00fcre\u00e7te ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi, araban\u0131n ise son olaydan \u00f6nce al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden, davac\u0131ya d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde tak\u0131lan ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 beyanlarla da tespit edildi\u011fi \u00fczere 7 adet bilezik ve 1 adet y\u00fcz\u00fck oldu\u011fu, bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda talep edilen ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde de\u011fil de d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn sonras\u0131 edinildi\u011fi veya d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden \u00f6nce ki\u015fisel e\u015fya olarak var oldu\u011fu ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011finden 7 adet bilezik ve 1 adet k\u00fcpenin d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn bor\u00e7lar\u0131 ve ev e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131m\u0131nda bozduruldu\u011fu, bu konuda davac\u0131n\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131n geri al\u0131nmamak \u00fczere kocaya ba\u011f\u0131\u015f \u015feklinde<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
verildi\u011fi hususunun ispat\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, ancak buna ili\u015fkin dosya kapsam\u0131nda bir delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile, 8.568,00TL de\u011ferinde 7 adet 22 ayar 18 gr bilezi\u011fin ve 129.00TL de\u011ferince 1 adet 14 ayar 3 gr y\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn aynen iadesine, m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde 8.697TL\u2019nin dava tarihinden itibaren i\u015fleyecek faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131dan tahsiline karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
\n
\u00d6zel Daire Bozma Karar\u0131:<\/div>\n
7. Eski\u015fehir 1. AileMahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde taraf vekilleri temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/div>\n
8. Yarg\u0131tay 3. Hukuk Dairesinin 12.05.2015 tarihli ve 2014\/14238 E., 2015\/8430 K.say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile;<\/div>\n
Daval\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcm davac\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddi ile, \u201c\u2026 Ancak; Dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde tak\u0131lan ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 kocadan istirdat\u0131 talebine ili\u015fkindir.<\/div>\n
Kural olarak d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn s\u0131ras\u0131nda tak\u0131lan ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131, para kim taraf\u0131ndan tak\u0131l\u0131rsa tak\u0131ls\u0131n, aksine bir anla\u015fma bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a kad\u0131na ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r ve art\u0131k onun ki\u015fisel mal\u0131 niteli\u011fini kazan\u0131r. Bu e\u015fyalar\u0131n iade edilmemek \u00fczere kocaya verildi\u011fi, kad\u0131n\u0131n iste\u011fi ve onay\u0131 ile bozdurulup m\u00fc\u015fterek ihtiya\u00e7lar i\u00e7in harcand\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususu daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a kan\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde, koca bu e\u015fyalar\u0131 iadeden kurtulur.<\/div>\n
Somut olayda, daval\u0131 koca, davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n talep etti\u011fi ziynetlerin, evlili\u011fin devam\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn bor\u00e7lar\u0131 ve \u00e7ocuk edinmek i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan tedavi masraflar\u0131 i\u00e7in harcand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunmu\u015f, ancak davac\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n bunlar\u0131 iade edilmemek \u00fczere r\u0131za ile verdi\u011fini kan\u0131tlayamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n
H\u00e2l b\u00f6yle olunca mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere, daval\u0131 kocan\u0131n, m\u00fc\u015fterek ihtiya\u00e7lar i\u00e7in harcanan ziynetlerin, r\u0131zayla ve iade \u015fart\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n kendisine verildi\u011fini ispatlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle dava konusu ziynetleri iadeyle m\u00fckellef oldu\u011fu hususu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r.<\/div>\n
Ne var ki; HMK\u2019n\u0131n 188. maddesi gere\u011fince \u201cTaraflar\u0131n veya vekillerinin mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde ikrar ettikleri vak\u0131alar, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kar ve ispat\u0131 gerektirmez.\u201d<\/div>\n
Daval\u0131 taraf cevap dilek\u00e7elerinde, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde toplam 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir. Bu durumda, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde davac\u0131 kad\u0131na 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususu \u00e7eki\u015fmeli olmaktan \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n
\u00d6yle ise mahkemece, bu ilkeler g\u00f6zetilip, daval\u0131n\u0131n, davac\u0131 kad\u0131na tak\u0131lan bileziklerin adedi konusundaki ikrar\u0131 da dikkate al\u0131n\u0131p, toplam 12 adet bilezik \u00fczerinden davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken, yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme sonucu daval\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn s\u0131ras\u0131nda tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etti\u011fi 5 adet bilezik dikkate al\u0131nmadan, sadece 7 bilezik \u00fczerinden davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir\u2026\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle kararbozulmu\u015ftur.<\/div>\n
Direnme Karar\u0131:<\/div>\n
9. Eski\u015fehir 1. Aile Mahkemesinin 22.10.2015 tarihli ve 2015\/692 E., 2015\/716 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile \u00f6nceki gerek\u00e7eler yan\u0131nda \u201c\u2026Yarg\u0131tay 2. Hukuk Dairesinin 28\/12\/2006 tarih 10209-18598 say\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7tihad\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde damada hediye olarak tak\u0131lan 5 adet bilezi\u011fin kad\u0131na ba\u011f\u0131\u015flan\u0131p ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususu davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dile getirilmedi\u011fi gibi bu y\u00f6nde daval\u0131n\u0131n bir beyan\u0131 mevcut olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 12 adet bilezi\u011fin evlilik birli\u011finin devam\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn bor\u00e7lar\u0131 ve \u00e7ocuk edinmek i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan tedavi masraflar\u0131 i\u00e7in harcad\u0131\u011f\u0131 beyan\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak daval\u0131n\u0131n 12 adet bilezik hususunda beyan\u0131 5 adet daval\u0131ya hediye olarak tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ve d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn sonras\u0131 davac\u0131 kad\u0131na ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanma hususu ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2026\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
Direnme Karar\u0131n\u0131n Temyizi:<\/div>\n
10. Direnme karar\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
II. UYU\u015eMAZLIK<\/div>\n
11. Daval\u0131 vekilinin cevap dilek\u00e7esinde d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde 5 adedi m\u00fcvekkiline ait olmak \u00fczere toplam 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu beyan\u0131n mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde ikrar say\u0131larak 12 adet bilezik \u00fczerinden davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesinin gerekip gerekmedi\u011fi gerekti\u011fi noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
III. GEREK\u00c7E<\/div>\n
12. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc i\u00e7in konu ile ilgili yasal d\u00fczenleme ve kavramlar\u0131n k\u0131saca a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131nda yarar vard\u0131r.<\/div>\n
13. Ziynet; alt\u0131n, g\u00fcm\u00fc\u015f gibi k\u0131ymetli madenlerden yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup; insanlar taraf\u0131ndan tak\u0131lan s\u00fcs e\u015fyas\u0131 olarak tan\u0131mlanmaktad\u0131r (Y\u0131lmaz, E.: Hukuk S\u00f6zl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, Ankara 2011, s. 1529). Ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131n\u0131 evlilik m\u00fcnasebetiyle gelin ve damada verilen hediyeler olarak tan\u0131mlamak m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Bu ba\u011flamda, bilezik, alt\u0131n kelep\u00e7e, kolye, gerdanl\u0131k, tak\u0131 seti, bileklik, saat, k\u00fcpe ve y\u00fcz\u00fck gibi tak\u0131lar, ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131 olarak kabul edilmektedir (Sa\u011f\u0131ro\u011flu, M.\u015e.: Ziynet Davalar\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2013, s.3).<\/div>\n
14. Kad\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fc ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131; e\u015fler aras\u0131nda aksine bir anla\u015fma veya bu konuda yerel bir \u00e2det bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a evlilik s\u0131ras\u0131nda kim taraf\u0131ndan hangi e\u015fe tak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olursa olsun kad\u0131n e\u015fe ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r ve art\u0131k onun ki\u015fisel mal\u0131 niteli\u011fini kazan\u0131r.<\/div>\n
15. Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 05.05.2004 tarihli ve 2004\/4-249 E. ve 2004\/247 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 ilke benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
16. Bu noktada \u201cki\u015fisel mal\u201d kavram\u0131n\u0131n yasal olarak nas\u0131l d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi \u00fczerinde durulmal\u0131d\u0131r:<\/div>\n
4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu\u2019nun (TMK) 220.maddesinde;<\/div>\n
\u201cA\u015fa\u011f\u0131da say\u0131lanlar, kanun gere\u011fince ki\u015fisel mald\u0131r:<\/div>\n
1. E\u015flerden birinin yaln\u0131z ki\u015fisel kullan\u0131m\u0131na yarayan e\u015fya,<\/div>\n
2. Mal rejiminin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131nda e\u015flerden birine ait bulunan veya bir e\u015fin sonradan miras yoluyla ya da herhangi bir \u015fekilde kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131z kazanma yoluyla elde etti\u011fi malvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferleri,<\/div>\n
3. Manevi tazminat alacaklar\u0131,<\/div>\n
4. Ki\u015fisel mallar yerine ge\u00e7en de\u011ferler.\u201d<\/div>\n
ki\u015fisel mal olarak say\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup,ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 222\/1. maddesinde;<\/div>\n
\u201cBelirli bir mal\u0131n e\u015flerden birine ait oldu\u011funu iddia eden kimse, iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispat etmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr\u201d \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenleme ile de ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn kime ait oldu\u011fu hususu g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
17. Dava konusu edilen bir hakk\u0131n ve buna kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan savunman\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 vak\u0131alar\u0131n (olgular\u0131n) var olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda mahkemeye kanaat verilmesi i\u015flemine ispat denir. \u0130spat\u0131n konusunu taraflar\u0131n \u00fczerinde anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131 ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne etkili olabilecek \u00e7eki\u015fmeli vak\u0131alar olu\u015fturur ve bu vak\u0131alar\u0131n ispat\u0131 i\u00e7in delil g\u00f6sterilir (6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu (HMK) m.187\/1). Herkes\u00e7e bilinen vak\u0131alarla, ikrar edilmi\u015f vak\u0131alar \u00e7eki\u015fmeli say\u0131lmaz (HMK m. 187\/2).<\/div>\n
18. Vak\u0131a (olgu) ise, 03.03.2017 tarihli ve 2015\/2 E. ve 2017\/1 K. say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda; kendisine hukuki sonu\u00e7 ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olaylar \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130spat\u0131 gereken olaylar, olumlu vak\u0131alar olabilece\u011fi gibi olumsuz vak\u0131alar da olabilir.<\/div>\n
19. Di\u011fer taraftan h\u00e2kim, taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu olan vak\u0131alar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini, kural olarak kendili\u011finden ara\u015ft\u0131ramaz. Bir olay\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini taraflar ispat etmelidir. Bir davada ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn hangi tarafa ait olaca\u011f\u0131 hususu ise 4721 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 6. maddesinde;<\/div>\n
“Kanunda aksine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, taraflardan her biri, hakk\u0131n\u0131 dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olgular\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ispatla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.” \u015feklinde belirtildi\u011fi gibi, usul hukukun en \u00f6nemli konular\u0131ndan biri olan ispat y\u00fck\u00fc kural\u0131, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK’n\u0131n 190. maddesinde de;<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
“\u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc, kanunda \u00f6zel bir d\u00fczenleme bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a, iddia edilen vak\u0131aya ba\u011flanan hukuki sonu\u00e7tan kendi lehine hak \u00e7\u0131karan tarafa aittir.” \u015feklinde h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/div>\n
20. Yukar\u0131da bahsedilen d\u00fczenlemelerden hareket edildi\u011finde, ispat y\u00fck\u00fc hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 durumu iddia eden ya da savunmada bulunan kimseye d\u00fc\u015fer. Ola\u011fan olan kad\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fc ziynet e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n kad\u0131n e\u015fin himayesinde bulunmas\u0131d\u0131r. Bunun aksini iddia eden kad\u0131n e\u015f iddias\u0131n\u0131 ispatla m\u00fckelleftir. Ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131 davas\u0131nda dava konusu alt\u0131nlar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu alt\u0131nlar\u0131n kad\u0131n e\u015fte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015f\u00fcpheye yer vermeyecek \u015fekilde ispatlanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/div>\n
21.\u00d6nemle vurgulamak gerekir ki kesin delil, yanlar\u0131 ve h\u00e2kimi ba\u011flayan, bu tip delillerle kan\u0131tlanan olay\u0131n hukuksal do\u011fru olarak kabul edilmesi gereken delillerdir. H\u00e2kimin kesin delilleri takdir yetkisi yoktur. Bu bi\u00e7imde ispatlanan hususu do\u011fru kabul etmek zorundad\u0131r.<\/div>\n
22. Hukukumuzda kesin deliller s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olup bunlar, ikrar (M\u00fclga 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu (HUMK) m. 236; HMK m.188), senet (HUMK m. 287; HMK m. 193), yemin (HUMK m. 337; HMK m. 228) ve kesin h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr (HUMK m. 237; HMK m. 303 ).<\/div>\n
23. \u0130krar, bir taraf\u0131n, di\u011fer taraf\u0131n ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc maddi olay\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011funu kabul etmesidir. HUMK’n\u0131n 236. maddesine g\u00f6re, ikrar eden taraf aleyhine kesin delil te\u015fkil eder. HMK\u2019n\u0131n 188.maddesi de benzer d\u00fczenleme getirmi\u015ftir. Bu d\u00fczenlemenin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131;<\/div>\n
\u201cTaraflar\u0131n veya vekillerinin mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde ikrar ettikleri vak\u0131alar, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kar ve ispat\u0131 gerektirmez\u201d<\/div>\n
\u015eeklindedir.<\/div>\n
24. Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, kad\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fc ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131 niteli\u011findeki bilezik e\u015fler aras\u0131nda aksine bir anla\u015fma veya bu konuda yerel bir \u00e2det bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a evlilik s\u0131ras\u0131nda kim taraf\u0131ndan hangi e\u015fe tak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olursa olsun kad\u0131n e\u015fe ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r ve art\u0131k onun ki\u015fisel mal\u0131 niteli\u011fini kazan\u0131r. Bu ilkeden hareketle, daval\u0131 erke\u011fin d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde toplam 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu beyan\u0131n 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 188. maddesi gere\u011fince mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde ikrar kabul edilmesi gerekir. Bu durumda, d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde davac\u0131 kad\u0131na 12 adet bilezik tak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususu \u00e7eki\u015fmeli olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kacakt\u0131r. O h\u00e2lde mahkemece bu bilezikler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/div>\n
25. Di\u011fer yandan, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n 6. bendinin 1. sat\u0131r\u0131nda yer alan \u201cpara\u201d kelimesinin dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k yaln\u0131zca bileziklere ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fundan 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 HMK\u2019n\u0131n 24. maddesinde belirtilen tasarruf ilkesi gere\u011fince bozma karar\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/div>\n
26. Mahkemece a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131larak, sonucuna g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyle \u00f6nceki kararda direnilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/div>\n
27. Nitekim \u00d6zel Daire de bozma karar\u0131nda ayn\u0131 hususa i\u015faret etmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n
28. Bu durumda direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda ve yukar\u0131daki belirtilen bu il\u00e2ve gerek\u00e7e ve nedenlerle bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
IV. SONU\u00c7:<\/div>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/div>\n
1. \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n 6. bendinin 1. sat\u0131r\u0131nda yer alan \u201cpara\u201d kelimesinin bozma karar\u0131ndan \u00c7IKARILMASINA (III – 25),<\/div>\n
2. Davac\u0131 vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcyle, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen ve yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilave nedenlerden dolay\u0131 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun ge\u00e7ici 3. maddesine g\u00f6re uygulanmakta olan 1086 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Usul\u00fc Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 429. maddesi gere\u011fince BOZULMASINA,<\/div>\n
\u0130stek h\u00e2linde temyiz pe\u015fin harc\u0131n\u0131n yat\u0131rana geri verilmesine,<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Ayn\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 440\/III-1. maddesi gere\u011fince karar d\u00fczeltme yolu kapal\u0131 olmak \u00fczere 04.03.2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lan ikinci g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmede oy birli\u011fiyle ve kesin olarak karar verildi.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n

[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kad\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fc ziynet e\u015fyas\u0131 niteli\u011findeki bilezik e\u015fler aras\u0131nda aksine bir anla\u015fma veya bu konuda yerel bir \u00e2det bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a evlilik s\u0131ras\u0131nda kim taraf\u0131ndan hangi e\u015fe tak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olursa olsun kad\u0131n e\u015fe ba\u011f\u0131\u015flanm\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r ve art\u0131k onun ki\u015fisel mal\u0131 niteli\u011fini kazan\u0131r.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10388,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[52],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10446"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10448,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10446\/revisions\/10448"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10388"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}