{"id":1252,"date":"2023-12-18T09:55:00","date_gmt":"2023-12-18T09:55:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/?p=1252"},"modified":"2023-12-18T09:55:00","modified_gmt":"2023-12-18T09:55:00","slug":"yargitay-karari-adli-belge-inceleme-tahrifat-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/2023\/12\/18\/yargitay-karari-adli-belge-inceleme-tahrifat-3\/","title":{"rendered":"YARGITAY KARARI &#8211; ADL\u0130 BELGE \u0130NCELEME &#8211; Tahrifat"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan verilen 18.10.2012 tarih, 2012\/25750 Esas ve 2012\/30003 Say\u0131l\u0131 Karar\u0131nda \u00f6zetle;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Sair temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde de\u011fil ise de; HMK.nun 207. (HUMK.nun 298.) maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince senetteki d\u00fczeltmelerin ke\u015fideci taraf\u0131ndan paraf edilmesi gereklidir. \u00c7ekin ke\u015fide tarihinde tahrifat yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve paraf imzas\u0131n\u0131n da sahte oldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki itirazlar bilirki\u015fi incelemesi ile sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p>Alacakl\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan bonoya dayal\u0131 olarak kambiyo senetlerine mahsus haciz yoluyla ba\u015flat\u0131lan takibe kar\u015f\u0131 bor\u00e7lunun, vade tarihindeki y\u0131l hanesinde yer alan 5 rakam\u0131n\u0131n sonradan tahrif edilerek 8 yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131 ile takibin iptali istemi ile icra mahkemesine ba\u015fvurdu\u011fu, mahkemece, istemin reddine karar verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p>Bor\u00e7lu icra mahkemesine ba\u015fvurusunda dayanak senedin vade tarihinde tahrifat yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131nda bulunmu\u015f, alacakl\u0131 da cevap dilek\u00e7esinde tahrifat yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f, mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan da senet metnindeki t\u00fcm <strong>yaz\u0131<\/strong> ve <strong>rakamlar\u0131n<\/strong> g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc itibariyle ayn\u0131 elin \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esi ile dava reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<p>Takibe dayanak <strong>senet<\/strong> asl\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde, \u00e7\u0131plak g\u00f6zle vade tarihi 12.12.2008 olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcyor ise de 8 rakam\u0131 \u00fczerinde git gel oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan vade tarihindeki bu g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcn\u00fcn <strong>tahrifat<\/strong> niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6zel ve teknik bilgiyi gerektiren bir husus olup, bilirki\u015fi incelemesi ile ortaya \u00e7\u0131kacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p>O halde, mahkemece, dayanak senetteki vade tarihi \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin tahrifat niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 <strong>bilirki\u015fi<\/strong> <strong>incelemesi<\/strong> yapt\u0131r\u0131larak belirlendikten sonra olu\u015facak sonuca g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7e ile istemin reddi isabetsizdir denildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n<p>Sonu\u00e7 olarak; bor\u00e7lunun icra mahkemesine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvuruda, dayanak senedin vade tarihinde <strong>tahrifat<\/strong> yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu, alacakl\u0131n\u0131n ise cevap dilek\u00e7esinde tahrifat yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etti\u011fi ve mahkemenin, <strong>senet<\/strong> metnindeki t\u00fcm <strong>yaz\u0131<\/strong> ve <strong>rakamlar\u0131n<\/strong> g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc itibariyle ayn\u0131 elin \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esi ile davay\u0131 reddetmi\u015f oldu\u011fu, kararda, takip dayana\u011f\u0131 <strong>senet<\/strong> asl\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde, \u00e7\u0131plak g\u00f6zle vade tarihi 12.12.2008 olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcyor ise de 8 rakam\u0131 \u00fczerinde git gel oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, vade tarihindeki bu g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcn\u00fcn <strong>tahrifat<\/strong> niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6zel ve teknik bilgiyi gerektiren bir husus olup, <strong>bilirki\u015fi incelemesi<\/strong> ile ortaya \u00e7\u0131kaca\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n<p>bu durumda, mahkemece, dayanak senetteki vade tarihi \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan i\u015flemin <strong>tahrifat<\/strong> niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 <strong>bilirki\u015fi incelemesi<\/strong> yapt\u0131r\u0131larak belirlendikten sonra olu\u015facak sonuca g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekirken, yaz\u0131l\u0131 gerek\u00e7e ile istemin reddi isabetsizdir denilerek bozma karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan verilen 18.10.2012 tarih, 2012\/25750 Esas ve 2012\/30003 Say\u0131l\u0131 Karar\u0131nda \u00f6zetle; Sair temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde de\u011fil ise de; HMK.nun 207. (HUMK.nun 298.) maddesi h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince senetteki d\u00fczeltmelerin ke\u015fideci taraf\u0131ndan paraf edilmesi gereklidir. \u00c7ekin ke\u015fide tarihinde tahrifat yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve paraf imzas\u0131n\u0131n da sahte oldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki itirazlar bilirki\u015fi incelemesi ile sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Alacakl\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1253,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_post_transparent":"default","_kad_post_title":"default","_kad_post_layout":"default","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"default","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"default","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[32,77,76,67,41],"class_list":["post-1252","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-bilirkisi-raporu","tag-imza-inceleme","tag-rakam","tag-tahrifat","tag-yazi"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1252"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1252"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1252\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1254,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1252\/revisions\/1254"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1253"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mecidiyekoywebtasarim.com\/istanbulkriminalofis\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}