T.C. SUPREME
5.law office
Main: 2014/4788
Decision: 2014/12549
Date of decision: 06.05.2014
- EXCESSIVE DETERMINATION OF THE COST OF THE EASEMENT-THE APPLICATION AND POWER OF ATTORNEY CROSSES DEPOSITED BY THE PLAINTIFF MUST BE RETURNED – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
Abstract: the subject matter of the immovable nature of the case, the geometric situation, area, and considering the rate of impairment due to the route of a power transmission line easement percent of all the value of the real estate (1) pass disregarding detect and report a higher proportion of impairment, according to the cost of the easement more determination, the claimant should be returned by reference and mandate of the Cross of the party thought that it is not deposited, the right has been seen. The verdict should have been overturned.
(4721 P. K. m. 756)
Litigation and Decision: hand over immovable passed between the parties thrown kamulastirmasiz energy transmission line pylon with the price of exchange for the easement place due to the case made the collection at the end of the trial: the case for the acceptance of the verdict to the Supreme Court and the numbers given above as day written examination, the petitioner issued by the defendant has been requested by the administrative Regent in the file showed that it was thought that after the dispute review documents and discussed the need:
The case relates to the request for the collection of the value of the real estate transferred to the energy transmission line by confiscating it without expropriation and the equivalent of the easement right at the cost of the pylon location.
The court decided to accept the case, the decision was appealed by the deputy defendant administration.
As for the method, there was no hit in the valuation of land real estate that is the subject of the case according to the income method and in deciding on the collection of the pylon location price and the easement provision, there was no hit as of the method.
But;
1 – the subject matter of the immovable nature of the case, the geometric situation, area, and considering the rate of impairment due to the route of a power transmission line easement percent of all the value of the real estate (1) pass disregarding detect and report a higher proportion of impairment, according to the determination of the cost of the easement more,
2 – It is not considered that the application and power of attorney crosses deposited by the plaintiff party should be returned,
It is not considered correct.
Conclusion: Since the appeals of the plaintiff’s deputy are in place, the decision is H. For the reasons described.U.M.K.nun 428. it was unanimously decided on 06.05.2014 that the appeal fee received in advance should be refunded at the request and the appeal fee should be registered in the Treasury by unanimous decision. (¤¤)
