Cancellation Of The Objection To The Enforcement Proceeding Based On Eviction Commitment
T.C.
JUDICIARY
6TH CIVIL CHAMBER
E. 2015/13141
K. 2016/6753
T. 16.11.2016
CASE : The decision on the eviction case given by the local court, dated and numbered above, has been appealed by the plaintiff within the time limit, all the papers in the file have been read and discussed and considered.
DECISION : The lawsuit is related to the request for cancellation of the objection to the enforcement proceeding initiated based on the eviction commitment. The court decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that the commitment was not valid, and the judgment was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney.
There is no dispute about the 1-year contract signed between the parties on 01.07.2009 and the start date of the lease agreement was determined as 01.08.2009. After the execution of the contract, it was agreed that the leased property would be evacuated on 01.08.2011 with the evacuation undertaking in the form of an arrangement numbered 18005 Yev. of the … 26th Notary Public on 21.07.2009, but later on, the date of evacuation of the immovable property was changed to 01.08.2015 with the ordinary written document prepared by handwriting under the same document. The plaintiff lessor requested the evacuation of the leased property by sending an evacuation order to the defendant with the enforcement proceeding initiated on 04.08.2015 based on the said undertaking. After the eviction order was served to the defendant on 08/08/2015, the defendant, who objected to the proceeding in due time, stated that the signature under the commitment letter based on the enforcement proceeding did not belong to him and that he did not accept the signature under the commitment letter. However, since the defendant tenant objected to the signature in the aforementioned letter of undertaking, and since the lawsuit petition requests the cancellation of the defendant’s objection to the enforcement proceeding, the court should focus on the defendant’s objection to the signature in the ordinary written undertaking based on the enforcement proceeding, have an expert examination to determine whether the signature belongs to the defendant and make a decision according to the result to be obtained, but it is not correct to decide to dismiss the case on written grounds.
The judgment should be reversed for this reason.
CONCLUSION : For the reasons explained above, it was unanimously decided on 16/11/2016 to accept the appellate objections and to VACATE the judgment pursuant to Article 428 of the Code of Civil Procedure in accordance with the provisional Article 3 added to the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 with the Law No. 6217, and to refund the prepaid appeal fee to the appellant, if requested.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.