T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.law office
Base: 2016/10162
Decision: 2016/10473
Date of Decision: 14.06.2016
THE CASE ARISING FROM FORECLOSURE – THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR RIGHT THAT THE DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COURT JUL WILL NOT EXCEED THE SPECIFIED AMOUNT IN ORDER TO CONDUCT AN APPEAL REVIEW – THE VALUE OF THE OFFENDING PROPERTY REMAINS BELOW THE APPEAL LIMIT – THE APPEAL PETITION IS REJECTED
ABSTRACT: Appendix 1 of the IIK. October 2012. in accordance with the article, this monetary limit is a duplicate of the Law No. 213 on monetary limits applied in the previous year, effective from the beginning of each calendar year.. according to the article, it is applied by increasing the re-evaluation rate determined and announced by the Ministry of Finance every year. The limits set in this way….its parts not exceeding are not taken into account.Accordingly, when the calculation is made, the subject of the appeal must be located above ….TL in order to appeal the decisions to be made by the executive courts in 2016 IIK …. In order to conduct an appeal review in ration cases, the article of which is considered to be among the decisions that can be appealed, as well as in the taliki decisions of the proceedings related to ration cases, it is necessary that the value of the property or right that the decision of the executive court has decided exceeds this established amount according to the special regulation contained in the last sentence of the same paragraph.In the concrete case, the value of the victims who are the subject of appeal is below … TL.In this case, the appeal petition must be rejected, since the provision is final.
(2004 P. K. m. 363, 365, 366, October. m. 1) (213 p. K. m. 298)
Case and Decision: After the appellant requested the appellant’s examination within the time limit of the Court decision written above, the date and number of the case file was sent to the Department from the scene and the report prepared by the Examining Judge for the case file was heard and all the documents in the file were read and examined after the job was discussed and considered as necessary:
Article 101 of the Law No. 4949 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004. amended by article 363. according to the provision of the article; In order for decisions to be made by the executive courts after 30.07.2003, when the Law enters into force, to be appealed, the value of the case to be appealed must exceed 2,000.00 TL.
Article 102 of the Law No. 4949 on HRST. appendix 1, October 2012. in accordance with Article 298 of the Tax Procedure Code No. 213, this monetary limit is a duplicate of the monetary limits applied in the previous year, effective from the beginning of each calendar year. according to the article, it is applied by increasing the re-evaluation rate determined and announced by the Ministry of Finance every year. Portions of the limits set in this way that do not exceed Ten million TL (10.00 TL) are not taken into account.
Accordingly, when the calculation is made, the subject of the appeal must be over 6.310,00 TL in order to appeal the decisions to be made by the executive courts in 2016.
363/1 of the IIK. paragraph (7) ration decisions that can be appealed under considered to be among cases and legal actions to follow up on the decisions made in the appellate review Talik in the last sentence of the same paragraph before it can be given according to the special arrangement of enforcement of the decision of the court of the value of the goods or the right taalluk it is imperative that you go through this amount.
In the concrete case, the value of the victims subject to appeal is less than 6.310,00 TL.
In this case, the appeal petition must be rejected, since the provision is final.
Conclusion: Addition 1, 363, 365/3 of the IIK for the above reasons. in accordance with articles 366/3 of the IIK by the parties to the REJECTION of the appeal petition. in accordance with Article 29.20, which is received in advance upon request, a request for correction of the decision may be made against the decision within 10 days from the notification of the Supreme Court of Cassation. the restitution of the appeal fee to the appellant was decided unanimously on 14.06.2016.
