Summary:
In the follow-up based on the exchange note, the objection to the debt and the signature must be filed with the Executive Court within five days.
T.C.
Supreme
General Assembly of Law
Mainly No:2012/806
Decision No:2013/286
K. Historical:
(….. 168/5 of the IIK.in accordance with the article, the signature of the debtor on the promissory note
it is mandatory that he either does not owe money, or the debt has been amortized, or the amount has been granted, or the receivable has expired, or that he notify the executive court within five days of his objections to the authority.
In the concrete case, it is seen that muteriz debtor’s payment order No. 10 was notified on 27.12.2010, and on 21.02.2011, the debtor applied to the executive court and requested that the cancellation of the follow-up be decided due to the absence of his signature and the title of the debtor in the promissory notes.
Since the irregularity of the notification process of the payment order has not been asserted, the court has decided that the application should be submitted in accordance with Article 168 of the IIK. in accordance to the legal five-day period after made after considering the appeals of denial of due to timeout instead of deciding, the borrower does not have driver’s license and this is also in the pursuit of passive hostility complaint in writing and are considered to be indefinite follow up is to be made the decision on cancelling isabetsiz…) the reason is disrupted, and the file is translated back into place with a newly rebuilt at the end of the trial; the previous decision by the court was one stand.
THE APPELLANT: The defendant’s deputy
DECISION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF JURISPRUDENCE
After it was understood that the decision to resist was appealed during the examination by the General Assembly of the Law and the papers in the file were read, the requirement was discussed:
The case is related to the cancellation of the proceedings.
As a result of the examination of the documents by the court; a person who does not participate in any stage of the exchange notes as a borrower does not consent to the follow-up of a person who has not taken part in any stage of the follow-up against the debtor, the tracking law does not approve of the follow-up of a person who does not have the opportunity to follow-up against him due to the absence of passive hostility, without any period of time in the copies of certified promissory notes available in the execution file, 170 a of the IIK of the acceptance of the case filed on the grounds that it is possible for the enmity to request the cancellation of the proceedings due to the fact that it is related to public order, and the follow-up conducted about the complainant due to the absence of passive enmity due to the absence of passive enmity md.si accordingly, it was decided to cancel it and to reject the compensation request.
Upon the appeal of the defendant’s attorney, the judgment of the Special Chamber was overturned on the same grounds as the text of the title section above.
By the Court; “….The turnover of the plaintiff in the range that is used as the signature itself is not binding on the bill from Sadir bet there won’t be therefore wants iptil pursuit, accordingly, the denial of the plaintiff arising from the signature of a cancellation request with the subject of litigation in the event that the subject argument is severed and husumetsizlik 170. not in the sense of Article of the light 170/the person that was mentioned in an article to be talking about the conflict that has its own signature on the bill be referred to the responsibility of noting a name that has suggested that if the subject of complaints, complaints husumetsizlik of the argument for the reason that indefinitely are subject to public order because it is related to the tracking of light 170/article according to the termination, the compensation denial of the request.” the decision has been made.
The decision was appealed by the deputy defendant.
The dispute that has come before the General Assembly of the Law shall be resolved in accordance with Article 168 of the IIK of the plaintiff’s request.itirazm and debt securities specified in the signature of the item; otherwise, the EBL 170/item (of the borrower in terms of foreign exchange law, complaints) a complaint is based on the 5 day period will be considered accordingly that or indefinitely is subject to that complaint, as a result, follow-up whether to cancel are collected at the point of decision was correct.
Istanbul 8. When the Execution Directorate’s file based on 2010/31686 is examined, the respondent creditor S. Food, etc. Ltd. Şti.out of litigation by B. Pastry and Bakery Food Industry Co., Ltd. Tic. A.Sh.with plaintiff B.G. and off-case E. Food Hotels and Bakeries, etc. Ltd. Şti. against 15.239.63 TL. for the total receivable, TRY 3,000 dated 11.06.2010. a tracking request dated 22.12.2010 and a payment order and underlying documents dated the same date, in which tracking is made by foreclosure specific to foreign exchange notes based on 5 bonds with a price, B.G.it is understood that it was notified to the on 27.12.2010.
The plaintiff, on the other hand, stated that a follow-up based on a foreign exchange bill was made against him by the defendant company with his petition dated 21.02.2011, B, which is shown as a debtor in the follow-up. etc. A.Sh. he claimed that he was a signature official authorized to represent with a joint signature, that he had no turnover in the exchange notes based on the follow-up, that he could not be a party to the follow-up, that the signature on the company’s stamp was not his own, that it could not be directed to him, that he objected to the follow-up in terms of hostility and signature, and asked for 40% compensation with the cancellation of the follow-up.
As is known, Article 168 of the Executive Bankruptcy Code of 2004. in the article, the issues that will be written to the payment order in the follow-up by way of foreclosure for foreign exchange notes are regulated. Accordingly; 3. if the promissory note that is subject to follow-up is not qualified as a foreign exchange promissory note, it is necessary to complain to the authority within five days; 4. if the applicant claims that the signature on the foreign exchange note does not belong to him, he must notify the executive court of this with a clear petition within five days; otherwise, the signature on the exchange note will be deemed to be faithful to him in the execution process to be carried out in accordance with this chapter, and if he unfairly denies his signature, he will be sentenced to a ten percent fine based on the said year, and if he does not bring a decision on the acceptance of his appeal from the authority, the execution will continue in force majeure; 5.of the debt or the debtor is not at the dam are being amortized or where the grace given or receivable by executive or the reasons for the appeal along with the prescription of a petition to the court within five days of admission objection from the authority by declaring a decision does not have to be stated that the warning should be written in resume foreclosures.
In the concrete case, the plaintiff has no objection to the irregularity of the payment order. The plaintiff objected to the side debt and the signature. The payment order was notified to the plaintiff on 27.12.2010, he filed the current case on 21.02.2011 and is subject to Article 168 of the IIK. since the 5-day period specified in the article has elapsed, the appeal must be rejected due to the expiration date of the Special Apartment violation notice is in place.
For the reasons described, it is necessary to comply with the annulment decree adopted by the General Assembly of the Law on the grounds specified in the Special Chamber annulment decree, while it is contrary to the procedure and law to resist the previous decision. Therefore, the decision to resist must be overturned.
result
30 of Law No. 6217 on the acceptance of appeals by the defendant’s deputy, for the reasons indicated in the decision to overturn the decision of the Private Chamber of the decision to resist, No. 6217. article 429 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 1086, which is applied with the reference to the “Provisional article 3” added to the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100. in accordance CORRUPTION…
