{"id":1614,"date":"2021-12-06T19:12:56","date_gmt":"2021-12-06T16:12:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/?p=1614"},"modified":"2023-05-25T14:26:19","modified_gmt":"2023-05-25T14:26:19","slug":"aval-icin-es-rizasi-gerekmez","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/2021\/12\/06\/aval-icin-es-rizasi-gerekmez\/","title":{"rendered":"Aval i\u00e7in e\u015fin r\u0131zas\u0131 aranmaz"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Avalin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in e\u015fin r\u0131zas\u0131 aranmaz.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

YARGITAY BA\u015eKANLI\u011eI
11. Hukuk Dairesi 2019\/3480 E. , 2019\/5889 K.

Eski\u015fehir Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesince verilen 20\/03\/2019 tarih ve 2019\/346 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay’ca
incelenmesi ihtiyati haciz talep eden vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenmi\u015f ve temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde
verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla dava dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik Hakimi … taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen rapor
dinlenildikten ve yine dosya i\u00e7erisindeki dilek\u00e7e layihalar, duru\u015fma tutanaklar\u0131 ve t\u00fcm belgeler okunup,
incelendikten sonra i\u015fin gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n\n\n\n


\u0130htiyati hacze itiraz edenler vekili, 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 TBK’n\u0131n 584\/1’inci maddesinde e\u015flerden birinin ancak
di\u011fer e\u015fin yaz\u0131l\u0131 r\u0131zas\u0131 ile kefil olabilece\u011finin d\u00fczenlendi\u011fini, avalin de kefalet h\u00fckm\u00fcnde oldu\u011funu, ayn\u0131
Kanunun 603’\u00fcnc\u00fc maddesi uyar\u0131nca 584’\u00fcnc\u00fc maddedeki d\u00fczenlemenin, avale de uygulanmas\u0131
gerekti\u011fini, ihtiyati hacze konu \u00e7ekte aval veren m\u00fcvekkili …’\u0131n e\u015fi …’\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131 almadan “
avalimdir” ibaresini \u00e7ek \u00fczerinde imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu sebeplerle muteriz …’\u0131n verdi\u011fi avalin ge\u00e7ersiz
oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek m\u00fcvekkili aleyhine verilen ihtiyati haciz karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.
\u0130htiyati haciz talep eden vekili, \u0130\u0130K’n\u0131n 265’inci maddesinde g\u00f6sterilmeyen sebeplerle itiraz
edilemeyece\u011fini, ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen hususlar\u0131n ba\u015fka bir davaya konu olabilece\u011fini, m\u00fcvekkilinin satt\u0131\u011f\u0131 beton
direklerinin kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bor\u00e7lu \u015firketten \u00e7ek ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kefalet i\u00e7in d\u00fczenlenen TBK’n\u0131n 581 ve devam\u0131
maddelerinin k\u0131yas yoluyla farkl\u0131 bir m\u00fcessese olan, kefaletin aksine imzalayan\u0131 asli bor\u00e7 alt\u0131na sokan
ve TTK’da d\u00fczenlenen aval i\u00e7in uygulanamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu sebeple avalde e\u015fin yaz\u0131l\u0131 r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131n
aranmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunarak itiraz\u0131n reddini istemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Mahkemece, iddia, savunma ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re, kefaletin T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Yasas\u0131’nda, avalin
ise T\u00fcrk Ticaret Yasas\u0131’nda d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, farkl\u0131 kurumlar oldu\u011fu, kefalete ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin k\u0131yasen
avalde uygulanamayaca\u011f\u0131, itiraza dayanak g\u00f6sterilen yasa maddesinin de aval i\u00e7in de\u011fil kefalet i\u00e7in
d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle ihtiyati hacze itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f ve mahkemece \u00f6nceki kararda
direnilmi\u015ftir. \u0130tiraz eden bor\u00e7lular vekilinin temyizi \u00fczerine Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 29.11.2018 tarih,
2017\/11-154 E., 2018\/1807 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f,
mahkemece bozma ilam\u0131na uyularak ihtiyati hacze itiraz\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.
Karar\u0131, ihtiyati haciz isteyen vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Talep ihtiyati hacze itiraz istemine ili\u015fkindir. Mahkemece, itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f, Dairemizce bu
karar avalin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in e\u015fin r\u0131zas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle bozulmu\u015ftur. Bu kez mahkemece
bozma karar\u0131na uyulmak suretiyle itiraz\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015f ise de uyulan bozma karar\u0131nca
olu\u015fan usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakk\u0131n istisnalar\u0131ndan birisi de sonradan \u00e7\u0131kan \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131d\u0131r.
Bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra 20.04.2018 tarih, 2017\/4 E. – 2018\/5 K. ile B\u00fcy\u00fck Genel Kurulca avalin ge\u00e7erli
olabilmesi i\u00e7in e\u015fin r\u0131zas\u0131na gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f oldu\u011fundan <\/strong>itiraz reddine karar vermek
gerekirken kab\u00fcl\u00fcne karar verilmesi do\u011fru olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


SONU\u00c7: Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7eyle, ihtiyati haciz talep eden vekilinin temyiz talebinin kabul\u00fc ile
yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn an\u0131lan taraf yarar\u0131na BOZULMASINA, \u00f6dedi\u011fi pe\u015fin temyiz harc\u0131n\u0131n iste\u011fi
halinde temyiz edene iadesine, 26\/09\/2019 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.
03\/03\/2021 14:48 Yarg\u0131tay Bilgi \u0130\u015flem Merkezi M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Taraf\u0131ndan Olu\u015fturulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Avalin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in e\u015fin r\u0131zas\u0131 aranmaz. YARGITAY BA\u015eKANLI\u011eI11. Hukuk Dairesi 2019\/3480 E. , 2019\/5889 K. Eski\u015fehir Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesince verilen 20\/03\/2019 tarih ve 2019\/346 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay’caincelenmesi ihtiyati haciz talep eden vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenmi\u015f ve temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin s\u00fcresi i\u00e7indeverildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla dava dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik Hakimi … taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen rapordinlenildikten ve yine dosya i\u00e7erisindeki […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1805,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22],"tags":[66,136,280],"class_list":["post-1614","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-icra-senet-cek-ticaret","tag-aval","tag-es-rizasi","tag-senet"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1614","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1614"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1614\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1814,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1614\/revisions\/1814"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1805"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1614"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1614"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1614"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}