Esas No:2017\/1683<\/strong> \u0130NCELENEN<\/strong>KARARIN<\/strong> T.C.\u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi8. Hukuk Dairesi Esas No:2017\/1683Karar No:2019\/385K. Tarihi: \u0130NCELENENKARARINMAHKEMES\u0130: \u0130stanbul A**** *** Asliye Ticaret MahkemesiTAR\u0130H\u0130 : 06\/07\/2017<br>NUMARASI : 2017\/3003 D.\u0130\u015f-2017\/3003 K.DAVANINKONUSU : Hakem Karar\u0131n\u0131n Tebli\u011fe \u00c7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 \/ Saklanmas\u0131\u0130ST\u0130NAFKARARTAR\u0130H\u0130: 28\/02\/2019<br>Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu \u0130tiraz Hakem Heyeti karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131, istinaf yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda;GERE\u011e\u0130D\u00dc\u015e\u00dcN\u00dcLD\u00dc:Ba\u015fvuran vekili Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonuna verdi\u011fi dilek\u00e7ede \u00f6zetle; daval\u0131 \u015firket nezdinde kasko sigortal\u0131 bulunan ve…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10362,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[66],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10935"}],"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=10935"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10935\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10936,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10935\/revisions\/10936"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10362"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Karar No:2019\/385<\/strong>
K. Tarihi:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
MAHKEMES\u0130<\/strong>: \u0130stanbul A**** *** Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesi
TAR\u0130H\u0130<\/strong> : 06\/07\/2017<<\/strong>br>NUMARASI<\/strong> : 2017\/3003 D.\u0130\u015f-2017\/3003 K.
DAVANIN<\/strong>KONUSU<\/strong> : Hakem Karar\u0131n\u0131n Tebli\u011fe \u00c7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 \/ Saklanmas\u0131
\u0130ST\u0130NAF<\/strong>KARAR<\/strong>TAR\u0130H\u0130<\/strong>: 28\/02\/2019<<\/strong>br>Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu \u0130tiraz Hakem Heyeti karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131, istinaf yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda;
GERE\u011e\u0130<\/strong>D\u00dc\u015e\u00dcN\u00dcLD<\/strong>\u00dc:Ba\u015fvuran vekili Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonuna verdi\u011fi dilek\u00e7ede \u00f6zetle; daval\u0131 \u015firket nezdinde kasko sigortal\u0131 bulunan ve vekil edenine ait olan … plaka say\u0131l\u0131 arac\u0131n 27\/06\/2016 <\/strong>tarihinde meydana gelen trafik kazas\u0131nda hasarland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, hasar bedelinin KDV<\/strong> hari\u00e7 57.965,60-TL<\/strong> oldu\u011funun yapt\u0131rd\u0131klar\u0131 ekspertiz incelemesi ile belirlendi\u011fini, bu durumda KDV<\/strong> dahil toplam 68.399,40-TL<\/strong> hasar bedeli ile hasar miktar\u0131n\u0131n tespiti i\u00e7in sigorta eksperine \u00f6denen 801,55-TL<\/strong> ile arac\u0131n kaza yerinden servisi bulundu\u011fu yere kadar \u00e7ekici marifetiyle g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclmesi nedeniyle yap\u0131lan 700,00-TL<\/strong> gider toplam\u0131 olan 69.900,95-TL<\/strong> tazminat\u0131n daval\u0131 … \u015firketince \u00f6denmesi gerekti\u011fini, ancak sigorta \u015firketine yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun reddedildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek, 69.900,95-TL<\/strong> tazminat\u0131n temerr\u00fct tarihinden i\u015fletilecek avans faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131 … \u015firketinden tahsiline karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.Daval\u0131 … \u015firketi vekili cevab\u0131nda \u00f6zetle; davac\u0131ya ait olan ve vekil edeni \u015firket nezdinde kasko sigortal\u0131 bulunan … plaka say\u0131l\u0131 ara\u00e7ta 27\/06\/2016 <\/strong>tarihinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen trafik kazas\u0131nda olu\u015fan hasar nedeniyle, vekil edeni \u015firkete 12\/07\/2016 <\/strong>tarihinde ba\u015fvuruldu\u011fu ve hasar dosyas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, s\u00f6z konusu kazada menfaat sahibi de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fi oldu\u011funu, ara\u00e7 s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fc … taraf\u0131ndan verilen dilek\u00e7e ile (arac\u0131 sat\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden) belirlendi\u011fini, bu durumda davac\u0131n\u0131n taleplerinin Kasko Sigortas\u0131 Genel \u015eartlar\u0131n\u0131n C.5 ve poli\u00e7e k\u0131lavuzu gere\u011fince reddi gerekti\u011fini savunmu\u015ftur.Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k Hakem Heyetince; Kasko Sigortas\u0131 Genel \u015eartlar\u0131n\u0131n C.5 maddesinde S\u00f6zle\u015fme s\u00fcresi i\u00e7erisinde menfaat sahibinin ilgili mevzuata uygun olarak de\u011fi\u015fmesi halinde, sigorta s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fti\u011fi anda kendili\u011finden feshedilmi\u015f olur ve feshin h\u00fck\u00fcm ifade etti\u011fi tarihe kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcrenin primi g\u00fcn esas\u0131na g\u00f6re hesap edilir ve fazlas\u0131 sigorta ettirene geri verilir. Sigorta s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fmesine ra\u011fmen, poli\u00e7enin yeni malikle devam\u0131 h\u00fckme ba\u011flanabilir. denildi\u011fi, daval\u0131 … \u015firketinin bu madde d\u00fczenlemesine dayan\u0131larak menfaat sahibi de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fi nedeniyle hasar bedelini \u00f6demekten ka\u00e7\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, oysa daval\u0131 … \u015firketi taraf\u0131ndan sunulan belgelerden de anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, noterden yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ge\u00e7erli bir sat\u0131\u015f\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fti\u011finden ve poli\u00e7enin m\u00fcnfesih hale geldi\u011finden s\u00f6z edilemeyece\u011fi, zira 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 KTK<\/strong>‘n\u0131n 20\/d madde h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca, ara\u00e7 sat\u0131\u015f ve devrinin ge\u00e7erli olmas\u0131 i\u00e7in noterce yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu bulundu\u011fu, haricen sat\u0131\u015fa dayan\u0131larak daval\u0131 … \u015firketinin \u00f6deme yapmaktan ka\u00e7\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n hakl\u0131 yan\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnden hareketle, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015f; sigorta \u015firketi vekilinin Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu \u0130tiraz Hakem Heyetine itiraz\u0131 \u00fczerine, itiraz hakem heyetince itiraz reddedilmi\u015f, SigortaTahkim Komisyonu \u0130tiraz Hakem Heyeti karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 … \u015firketi vekili taraf\u0131ndan istinaf yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurulmu\u015ftur.\u0130stinaf nedenleri; somut olayda menfaat de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin ara\u00e7 s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fcn\u00fcn beyan\u0131 ile a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirgin oldu\u011fu halde, noterden sat\u0131\u015f bulunmamas\u0131 nedeniyle, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesinin hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131n\u0131n satt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bedelini ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir ara\u00e7 i\u00e7in hasar bedeli talebinde bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n Medeni Kanunun 2.maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve kabule g\u00f6re de davac\u0131 taraf yarar\u0131na belirlenen vekalet \u00fccretinin hatal\u0131 belirlendi\u011fi hususlar\u0131na y\u00f6neliktir.Dava, kasko sigorta s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayan\u0131larak a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f maddi tazminat iste\u011fine ili\u015fkindir.
1-G\u00f6r\u00fclmekte olan davada, kayden davac\u0131ya ait bulunan… plaka say\u0131l\u0131 arac\u0131n 27\/06\/2016 <\/strong>tarihinde meydana gelen kazada hasarland\u0131\u011f\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu arac\u0131n davac\u0131 ile daval\u0131 aras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihi 23\/03\/2016,<\/strong> biti\u015f tarihi 23\/03\/2017 <\/strong>olan kasko sigorta poli\u00e7esi ile daval\u0131 … \u015firketi nezdinde sigortal\u0131 bulundu\u011fu ve kaza nedeniyle toplam zarar miktar\u0131n\u0131n 69.901,00-TL<\/strong> oldu\u011fu konusunda herhangi bir uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, dava konusu arac\u0131n haricen ara\u00e7 s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fc … isimli \u015fahsa sat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin belirleme nedeniyle, dava konusu talebin Kasko Sigortas\u0131 Genel \u015eartlar\u0131n\u0131n C.5 maddesi uyar\u0131nca teminat d\u0131\u015f\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.Kasko Sigortas\u0131 Genel \u015eartlar\u0131n\u0131n menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fmesi ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 C.5 maddesinde, s\u00f6zle\u015fme s\u00fcresi i\u00e7erisinde menfaat sahibinin ilgili mevzuata uygun olarak de\u011fi\u015fmesi halinde, sigorta s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fti\u011fi anda kendili\u011finden feshedilmi\u015f olur ve feshin h\u00fck\u00fcm ifade etti\u011fi tarihe kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcrenin primi g\u00fcn esas\u0131na g\u00f6re hesap edilir ve fazlas\u0131 sigorta ettirene geri verilir. Sigorta s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fmesine ra\u011fmen, poli\u00e7enin yeni malikle devam\u0131 h\u00fckme ba\u011flanabilir, denilmekte ise de, 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 KTK<\/strong>‘n\u0131n 20\/d madde h\u00fckm\u00fcne g\u00f6re, tescil edilmi\u015f ara\u00e7lar\u0131n her \u00e7e\u015fit sat\u0131\u015f ve devir i\u015flemleri arac\u0131n motorlu ara\u00e7lar vergisi borcu bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair belgenin ibraz\u0131 halinde, ara\u00e7 sahibi ad\u0131na d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f tescil belgesi esas al\u0131narak noterlerce yap\u0131l\u0131r. Noterlerce yap\u0131lmayan her \u00e7e\u015fit sat\u0131\u015f ve devir i\u015flemleri ge\u00e7ersizdir. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm, kamu d\u00fczenine ili\u015fkin bir h\u00fck\u00fcm niteli\u011finde bulundu\u011fundan, harici sat\u0131\u015f i\u015flemi ile \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015finin ara\u00e7 \u00fczerinden hukuken menfaati bulundu\u011funu kabul etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle, arac\u0131n kay\u0131t maliki d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir ki\u015fiye ait oldu\u011fu yolundaki iddialara de\u011fer verilerek, menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fti\u011fi ve sigorta aktinin sona erdi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenemez. Daval\u0131 … \u015firketi, menfaat sahibinin de\u011fi\u015fti\u011fi yolundaki iddias\u0131n\u0131, sat\u0131\u015f yoluyla m\u00fclkiyetin devredildi\u011fine dayand\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ve somut olayda devir i\u015flemi yasal olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik gerek\u00e7esinde ve takdirinde herhangi bir isabetsizlik bulunmamakta olup; TMK<\/strong>‘nun 2.maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir hususta s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir. (Yarg\u0131tay 17.HD’nin 13\/09\/2012 g\u00fcn 2012\/3937 E-2012\/9276 K.say\u0131l\u0131 emsal i\u00e7tihad\u0131)
2-Daval\u0131 vekilinin vekalet \u00fccretine ili\u015fkin istinaf itiraz\u0131na gelince; 5684 say\u0131l\u0131 Sigortac\u0131l\u0131k Kanunun 30\/17.maddesinde talebi k\u0131smen yada tamamen reddedilenler aleyhine h\u00fckmolunacak vekalet \u00fccreti Avukatl\u0131k Asgari \u00dccret Tarifesinde belirlenen vekalet \u00fccretinin be\u015fte biridir. denmektedir. An\u0131lan d\u00fczenlemenin daval\u0131 lehine – davac\u0131 taraf aleyhine h\u00fckmedilecek vekalet \u00fccretine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131 yarar\u0131na – daval\u0131 aleyhine h\u00fckmedilecek vekalet \u00fccretine ili\u015fkin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bu durumda davac\u0131 taraf yarar\u0131na A.A.\u00dc.T uyar\u0131nca tam ve nispi vekalet \u00fccreti tayin edilmesi de do\u011fru olmu\u015ftur.
\u0130stinaf edenin s\u0131fat\u0131na, istinaf\u0131n kapsam ve nedenlerine, dosya i\u00e7erisindeki bilgi ve belgelere, hakem karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde dayan\u0131lan delillerin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131p de\u011ferlendirilmesinde yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle herhangi bir isabetsizlik tespit edilemedi\u011finden daval\u0131 … \u015firketi vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun da HMK.m.353\/1-b\/1 h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca esastan reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131larak a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bi\u00e7imde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmi\u015ftir.
H\u00dcK\u00dcM:<\/strong> Gerek\u00e7e uyar\u0131nca;
1-Usul ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuka uygun bulunan 09\/06\/2017 <\/strong>g\u00fcn ve 2017\/\u0130.1511-2017\/\u0130HK<\/strong>-2042 say\u0131l\u0131 Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu \u0130tiraz Hakem Heyeti karar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak daval\u0131 …\u015e vekili taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun HMK<\/strong>. 353\/1-b\/1 maddesi gere\u011fince ESASTAN<\/strong>REDD\u0130NE<\/strong>,
2-\u0130stinaf yasa yoluna ba\u015fvuran daval\u0131 … \u015firketi taraf\u0131ndan pe\u015fin olarak yat\u0131r\u0131lan 154,30-TL<\/strong>ba\u015fvurma harc\u0131ndan al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken 85,70-TL<\/strong> istinaf ba\u015fvurma harc\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fc ile kalan 68,60-TL<\/strong> ile fazladan yat\u0131r\u0131lan 31,40-TL<\/strong> maktu istinaf karar ve ilam harc\u0131n\u0131n talep halinde daval\u0131 … \u015firketene \u0130ADES\u0130NE<\/strong>,
3-\u0130ncelemenin duru\u015fmas\u0131z olarak yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle avukatl\u0131k \u00fccreti takdirine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na,
4-Daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan istinaf a\u015famas\u0131nda yap\u0131lan giderlerin \u00fczerinde b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na,
HMK<\/strong>. m. 353\/1-b\/1 h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca, dosya \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda ve 7035 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 31 maddesi ile de\u011fi\u015fik HMK<\/strong>. m. 361\/1 maddesi gere\u011fince, karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren 2 hafta i\u00e7inde Yarg\u0131tay nezdinde temyiz yasa yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere, oy birli\u011fiyle karar verildi.28\/02\/2019.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"