Tenant-landlord fights have increased in recent months. Lawyers state that within the framework of the principle of ‘the tenancy does not end without giving the key’, the tenants who vacate the house due to the high rent should definitely certify that they have handed over the key to the property owner. Lawyers state that even if the tenant completes the move, the tenant retains its rights and obligations on the property unless the keys to the property are handed over to the landlord.
Evacuating the house where he lived for years, MK experienced the shock of his life when he could not document that he had handed over the key to the owner.
The aggrieved tenant who knocked on the court’s door was shaken by the execution proceedings initiated by the landlord, who demanded the collection of the 11-month rental fee even though he did not live. The landlord, who took action when the tenant objected to the proceedings, claimed that they initiated proceedings with a request for eviction for the unpaid rents against the debtor, that the objection of the debtor was unfair and that the rental fees were not paid.
The aggrieved tenant also stated that he was evicted with a notification in accordance with the lease agreement, that there was no rent debt for the period in which the workplace was used, and that the rental fees were paid on time and in full. Arguing that there is no rent debt for 11 months after the termination and eviction, the claimant landlord’s request should be rejected, the tenant demanded that the creditor be sentenced to bad faith compensation, not less than 20 percent of the amount subject to the proceedings.
The court ruled that the case be partially accepted. The 8th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, whose decision came into play when the victim tenant appealed, overturned the court’s decision. In the retrial, the court resisted in its first decision. When the defendant tenant appealed against this decision, this time the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Appeals intervened. The Board signed a landmark decision. In the decision, it is stated in the law that “If the evacuation date declared by the lessee is not accepted by the lessor, the obligation to prove that the rented property has been emptied actually and the key has been delivered, so that the tenancy relationship has been legally terminated on the date claimed by him. The tenant has to prove this claim with the documents written in paragraph 1 of article 269/c of the İİK. The following statements were included in the decision:
“In that case, since the debtor to whom the key was delivered cannot be proven with the documents written in the 1st paragraph of Article 269/c of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law no. 2004, the date notified by the creditor must be accepted as the discharge date. It is obligatory to prove by the debtor with the documents written in the 1st paragraph of the 269/c article of the EBL. Since the key delivered by the debtor cannot be proven with the documents written in the 1st paragraph of article 269/c of the EBL, the date notified by the creditor must be accepted as the discharge date. As such, the decision to resist had to be reversed due to these various reasons and reasons.
