<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n\tDairenin karar\u0131na g\u00f6re, \u0130stanbul’da ya\u015fayan bir ki\u015fi, 2020’de k\u0131z\u0131n\u0131n eski e\u015fine dava a\u00e7t\u0131. Davac\u0131, k\u0131z\u0131n\u0131n evli oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131 ve kendi ad\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 ev i\u00e7in kira talep ederken, eski damad\u0131n\u0131n evlilik s\u00fcrecinde kendisinden alt\u0131n ve d\u00f6viz cinsinden ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bor\u00e7lar\u0131n da \u00f6denmesini istedi.<\/p>\n
\n\tDaval\u0131 eski damat ise herhangi bir borcunun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, evli oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131z\u0131yla s\u00f6z konusu evde ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve aralar\u0131nda kira ili\u015fkisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savundu, eski kay\u0131npederinin bo\u015fanmay\u0131 kabullenemedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc.<\/p>\n
\n\tYarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan B\u00fcy\u00fck\u00e7ekmece 5. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi, hem kira hem de di\u011fer bor\u00e7 iddias\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n reddine karar verdi.<\/p>\n
\n\tDavac\u0131 kay\u0131npeder, istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun da reddi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 Yarg\u0131taya ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131.<\/p>\n
\n\tTemyiz incelemesini yapan Yarg\u0131tay 3. Hukuk Dairesi, kira istemi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ret karar\u0131n\u0131 hukuka uygun bularak onad\u0131, iddia olunan di\u011fer bor\u00e7lar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise bozma karar\u0131 verdi.<\/p>\n
\n\tDairenin, kira istemine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde, s\u00f6z konusu evin 5 y\u0131l boyunca davac\u0131n\u0131n eski damad\u0131 ile k\u0131z\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, taraflar aras\u0131nda kira s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilerek, “Mahkemece ret karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmekle, davac\u0131n\u0131n bu y\u00f6nlere ili\u015fkin temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddi gerekmi\u015ftir.” ifadelerine yer verildi.<\/p>\n
\n\tD\u00f6viz ve alt\u0131n cinsinden a\u00e7\u0131lan dava y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise gerek\u00e7ede, davac\u0131 kay\u0131npeder taraf\u0131ndan dava dosyas\u0131na, eski damat taraf\u0131ndan el yaz\u0131s\u0131yla yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bor\u00e7 miktarlar\u0131 ile “ald\u0131m” ifadesi bulunan bir ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131n sunuldu\u011fu belirtildi.\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b<\/p>\n
\n\t“Adi senet, bir bor\u00e7 ve hak do\u011furmak ya da bir borcu veya hakk\u0131 kan\u0131tlamak amac\u0131yla d\u00fczenlenen, resmi makamlar\u0131n kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, taraflarca d\u00fczenlenen, bor\u00e7lunun imzas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren yaz\u0131l\u0131 belgedir.” h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilen kararda, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu uyar\u0131nca bu t\u00fcr belgelerin delil say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 ifade edildi.<\/p>\n
\n\tBelli bir olay\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finin taraflarca ispat edilmesi gerekti\u011fi belirtilen kararda, “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.” de\u011ferlendirmesine yer verildi.<\/p>\n
\n\tKararda, belirtilen hususlar\u0131n ve adi senet olarak kabul edilebilecek belgenin mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b, bunun hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu, bu nedenle bozma karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi kaydedildi.<\/p>\n