On the Claim for the Compulsory Alienation (Buyout) of a Land Plot for State Needs

Home / Cases / On the Claim for the Compulsory Alienation (Buyout) of a Land Plot for State Needs

12 October 2026

On the Claim for the Compulsory Alienation (Buyout) of a Land Plot for State Needs

Civil case No. 1952-25-00-2/5853 was pending before Judge Zh. G. Zhumadilova of the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region, concerning a claim filed by the Akim of Karasai District (hereinafter referred to as the “civil claimant”) against BNA (hereinafter referred to as the “civil defendant”) for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of a land plot for state needs.

In the statement of claim, the claimant stated that, for the construction of the Ryskulov Highway, on the basis of documents submitted by the state institution “Department of Passenger Transport and Highways of Almaty Region,” as well as the land-use schedule and cartographic materials provided by a subdivision of the State Corporation “Government for Citizens,” a decision on the compulsory alienation of land plots had been adopted by Resolution No. 232 of the Akimat of Karasai District dated 18 July 2019, “On the Compulsory Alienation of Land Plots for State Needs, Including by Way of Buyout.”

The land plot owned by the defendant, BNA, under the right of ownership is subject to compulsory alienation (buyout) for state needs. The land plot is located in the Irgeli Rural District of Karasai District, Almaty Region; its designated purpose is personal subsidiary farming; cadastral number: No. 03-047-097-2557; the total area of the land plot is 0.0600 hectares, and the residential house located on the land plot, with an area of 153.0 square metres, is also subject to buyout for state needs.

There are no free land plots available within Karasai District; therefore, it is impossible to provide an equivalent land plot.

According to the Real Estate Valuation Report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, the market value of the land plot subject to buyout amounted to 46,045,700 (forty-six million forty-five thousand seven hundred) tenge.

On the basis of the foregoing, the claimant asked the court to carry out the compulsory alienation (buyout) of the land plot for state needs, determine the value of the land plot, and establish the value of the land plot being alienated at 46,045,700 tenge.

We disagree with the claimant’s arguments regarding the need for the court to determine the value of the land plot at 46,045,700 tenge for the following reasons.

Articles 4–6 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan state that the Constitution has supreme legal force and direct effect throughout the territory of the Republic, and that private property is recognised and equally protected.

Article 26 of the Constitution provides that no one may be deprived of their property except by a court decision. Compulsory alienation of property for state needs in exceptional cases provided for by law may be carried out subject to equivalent compensation for its value.

According to Article 257 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, upon termination of the right of ownership, property shall be valued on the basis of its market value, unless otherwise provided by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

In view of the above circumstances, the defendant submitted a report on the valuation of the market value of the house and land plot dated 2 December 2025, No. 413, prepared by Limited Liability Partnership “Assessment Group ‘Baqyt’,” concerning the market value of the house and land plot located at the following address: House 26/39, Quarter 13, Koksay Village, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, in connection with compulsory alienation for state needs. According to the said report, the value of the property was assessed at 100,640,000 tenge.

For the purpose of simplifying the court proceedings, the defendant indicated the following:

The valuation report submitted to the court by the claimant, prepared by Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” on 17 October 2025: 46,045,700 tenge;

The report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025, submitted to the court by the defendant: 100,640,000 tenge.

Pursuant to Article 88 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, under which an expert examination is conducted by a single expert or by a commission of experts. A commission examination is appointed where complex expert investigations are required and is conducted by at least two experts of the same specialisation.

On the basis of the said Article, the defendant approached Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” with a request to conduct a specialised commission construction and commodity examination by the following experts/specialists:

Tsoy Tatyana Yuryevna, holding Qualification Certificate No. 318 dated 28 March 2003, issued by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan, authorising her to conduct forensic examinations in specialisation 10.4, “Forensic Construction and Commodity Examination,” with 28 years of expert work experience, including service in forensic examination authorities;

Gulnaz Tursynkyzy Alaeva, holding Qualification Certificate No. 316 dated 28 March 2003, issued by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan, authorising her to conduct forensic examinations in specialisation 10.4, “Forensic Construction and Commodity Examination,” with 32 years of expert work experience, including service in forensic examination authorities.

On 23 January 2026, Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” issued Specialists’ Opinion No. 2, in which the experts were asked the following questions:

What is the market value of the land plot, excluding buildings, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39?
What is the market value of the residential house, utility and other structures, as well as fences?
What is the market value of the green plantings located on the land plot at the above address?
What is the cost of possible expenses associated with the seizure of the real estate located at the above address?

The specialists reached the following conclusions regarding these questions:

The market value of the land plot, excluding buildings, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 20,916,000 tenge.
The market value of the residential house, utility and other structures, as well as fences, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 53,512,196 tenge.
The market value of the green plantings located on the land plot at the address indicated above, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 291,486 tenge.
The cost of possible expenses (losses) associated with the seizure of the real estate located at the address indicated above, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 1,064,678 tenge.

Total: 75,784,360 tenge.

On 30 January 2026, in the civil case initiated on the claim of the Akim of Karasai District against the defendant, BNA, for the compulsory alienation of a land plot for state needs, the court issued a ruling appointing a forensic commodity examination.

The forensic examination was entrusted to experts of the Institute of Forensic Examinations for the City of Almaty of the Republican State Enterprise on the Right of Economic Management “Centre for Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan.”

The experts were asked the following question:

— What is the market value of the fence, the residential house with an area of 153 square metres, the outdoor toilet, the tapchan, the canopy, and the planted vegetation (rose bushes and thuja trees) located on a land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number No. 03-047-097-2557, situated in the Irgeli Rural District of Karasai District, Almaty Region?

According to Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, prepared by the Republican State Enterprise on the Right of Economic Management “Centre for Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Institute of Forensic Examinations of the City of Almaty,” expert/specialist A. G. Zholseitova concluded that the market value of the fence, the residential house with an area of 153 square metres, the outdoor toilet, the tapchan, the canopy, and the planted vegetation (rose bushes and thuja trees) located on the land plot may amount to 52,490,624 tenge.

In accordance with Paragraph 8 of Chapter 2 of the Valuation Standards approved by Order No. 519 of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 5 May 2018, the following sequence of actions is applied to determine the value of a real estate property using the comparative analysis method.

Methods of the comparative approach:

Comparative analysis method — determining value by comparing recent sales and asking prices of movable property objects comparable to the object being valued, after making appropriate adjustments to account for the differences between them;
Market information method — determining the value of movable property using information on asking prices published in the price lists of manufacturers, dealers, or other sources of information on asking prices;
Statistical modelling method — considering the object being valued as a representative of a certain group of homogeneous objects whose prices are known, where that group contains no exact analogue of the object being valued. After adjusting the prices of comparable objects to uniform conditions on the basis of information about similar objects included in such a group, a mathematical model of the dependence of price on one or more parameters is developed using statistical methods;
Correlation models method — a mathematical model of the dependence of price on one or more parameters. On the basis of this model, taking into account the parameters of each object being valued, the calculated value of the objects being valued is determined.

However, the report under review does not provide justification for the adjustments (adjustment coefficients) applied when calculating the value using the comparative approach.

Furthermore, contrary to the requirements of the valuation standards, the report does not contain a detailed calculation of the value of the property and provides only the data set out in the tabular section of the report, which constitutes a violation of the valuation standards.

When determining the final value, there is no justification for the weighting coefficients assigned to the results obtained using the comparative method, and the hierarchy analysis method recommended in methodological literature has not been applied.

No assessment was carried out of the damage caused to the owner of the residential house and land plot.

In accordance with Paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 9 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Paragraph 4 of Article 67 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On State Property,” the losses incurred are subject to full compensation.

Losses associated with the seizure of a residential house and land plot mean the expenses that the person whose ownership right has been infringed has incurred or will have to incur (actual damage), as well as income that the person could have received under normal conditions of civil circulation had their ownership right not been infringed, but did not receive (lost profits).

Calculation of Actual Damage

Actual damage means expenses incurred or to be incurred by a person whose ownership right has been infringed as a result of the seizure of property for state needs. The amount of actual damage is determined on the basis of payment documents submitted by the owner or, in their absence, on the basis of average market prices for similar expenses.

Actual damage includes:

expenses associated with moving to a new place;
expenses associated with registering rights to a new real estate property;
real estate agent fees;
expenses for renting property while searching for real estate to replace the property being alienated (temporary storage of property).

Expenses associated with the services of an advocate (lawyer). Payment for an advocate’s services is an expense borne by the owner.

According to Paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 9 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Paragraph 4 of Article 67 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On State Property,” the losses incurred are subject to full compensation.

Under the Real Estate Valuation Report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, the market value of the land plot subject to buyout was determined to be 46,045,700 tenge.

The above circumstances were not taken into account in the aforementioned expert/specialist opinions. The market value of the land plot and residential house was assessed with numerous violations, including serious violations in the selection of comparable properties and the application of the calculation methodology.

The results of the two aforementioned opinions, amounting to 46,045,700 tenge and 52,490,624 tenge, cannot be used as an evidentiary basis because the reports contain substantial indications of unreliability.

Honourable Court, we disagree with the valuation report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, and Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, prepared by the Republican State Enterprise on the Right of Economic Management “Centre for Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Institute of Forensic Examinations of the City of Almaty,” because we believe that the valuation in the said reports was conducted inadequately and without objectivity.

The fundamental principles of valuation activity are objectivity and reliability; however, these principles were not observed during the valuation. The violations in question directly affect the defendant’s interests because the valuation concerns property owned by the defendant and subject to seizure for state needs, meaning that it relates to the compulsory termination of ownership rights and eviction from the residential house.

Furthermore, in accordance with the requirements of the valuation standards, the report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, and Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026 do not contain a detailed calculation of the property’s value and provide only the information set out in the calculation table of the report, which constitutes a violation of the valuation standards. When determining the final value, there is no justification for assigning weighting coefficients to the results obtained using the comparative method, and the hierarchy analysis method recommended in methodological literature has not been applied.

It should be noted that the market is extensive and there are numerous offers for the sale of land plots. It is common knowledge that the defendant’s residential property is located in one of the elite districts intended for comfortable and safe living. Unfortunately, however, the valuer determined an understated value for the property being alienated.

In this regard, the defendant submitted the following documents to the court:

Report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025 — 100,640,000 tenge;

Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026 — 75,784,360 tenge.

We consider this report reliable and fair, and the market value stated therein to correspond to the actual market value of the real estate being alienated.

In accordance with Paragraph 2 of Article 67 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On State Property,” the value of a land plot alienated for state needs, as well as the real estate located on that land plot, shall be determined at their market value, regardless of the grounds on which the rights to the land plot arose.

According to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Valuation Activities,” market value is the most probable price at which an object may be alienated in a transaction under competitive conditions. The actual market price can be determined only where neither party to the transaction is obliged to sell or acquire the object and neither party is subject to coercion to enter into the transaction.

Honourable Court, the defendant’s family had made plans concerning this land plot, invested substantial funds in the real estate, and financed the development of the land plot’s infrastructure over an extended period. The claimant’s actions have caused irreparable harm to the family’s emotional well-being.

In accordance with Article 255 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, termination of ownership rights to real estate on the basis of a decision of a state body that is not directly aimed at seizing the property from its owner, including a decision to seize a land plot on which a house, other buildings, structures, or plantings belonging to the owner are located, is permitted only in the cases and in the manner established by legislative acts, subject to the provision of equivalent property to the owner and compensation for other losses incurred, or full compensation for all losses caused by the termination of ownership rights.

If the owner disagrees with a decision entailing the termination of ownership rights, that decision shall not be enforced until the dispute has been resolved through judicial proceedings. The issues of compensation for all losses caused to the owner shall also be resolved when the dispute is considered.

In view of the arguments set out above, the defendant asks the court to take into account the following documents:

Report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025 — 100,640,000 tenge;

Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026 — 75,784,360 tenge.

The amount stated in this report should be fairly accepted as the actual market value of the real estate being alienated.

According to Article 8 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, actions by individuals and legal entities aimed at causing harm to another person, abuse of rights in other forms, and the exercise of rights contrary to their purpose are prohibited. No one is entitled to derive advantages from their own bad-faith conduct.

In accordance with Article 68 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each piece of evidence shall be assessed in terms of relevance, admissibility, and reliability, and the body of evidence collected must be sufficient to resolve the civil case. However, the report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, and Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, submitted in the present civil case, are unsubstantiated as evidence.

According to Article 72 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims. However, this requirement has not been complied with in the statement of claim.

In accordance with Article 73 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, “Submission of Evidence,” evidence shall be submitted by the parties and other persons participating in the case to the court of first instance at the stage of preparation of the case for trial.

According to Article 8 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, everyone has the right to apply to a court for the protection of violated or disputed constitutional rights, freedoms, and legally protected interests.

In accordance with Article 15 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the parties independently and irrespective of the court and other bodies and persons choose their position, methods, and means of protecting their interests during civil proceedings.

Expenses associated with the services of an advocate (lawyer) are expenses borne by the owner.

According to Article 109 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, “Allocation of Court Costs Between the Parties,” the court shall award the party in whose favour the judgment has been rendered reimbursement of all court costs incurred in the case, payable by the other party. If the claim is satisfied in part, costs shall be awarded to the claimant in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court, and to the defendant in proportion to the part of the claims in respect of which the claimant was denied relief.

In accordance with Article 113 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, upon the application of the party in whose favour the judgment has been rendered, the court shall award from the other party the expenses actually incurred by the party for the services of a representative who participated in the proceedings and was not employed by that party.

For property claims, the total amount of such expenses shall not exceed ten per cent of the portion of the claims satisfied. For non-property claims, expenses shall be recovered within reasonable limits but shall not exceed three hundred monthly calculation indices.

On the basis of the said Article, the defendant sought legal assistance from the law office “Zakon i Pravo,” entered into Agreement No. 0312/22, and transferred 700,000 tenge to the office’s personal account. The agreement and the receipt issued by the Kaspi Pay application serve as confirmation.

According to Article 166 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the defendant submits to the court a response to the statement of claim, together with documents refuting the arguments of the claim and copies of the response and the documents attached thereto.

On the basis of the foregoing, and pursuant to Article 255 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Articles 166 and 46 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, we ask the court to:

WE ASK THE COURT TO:

Partially grant the claim of the Akim of Karasai District, Almaty Region, against the defendant, BNA, for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of a land plot for state needs.
Deny the claims insofar as they seek to determine the amount of compensation payable to the defendant for the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, owned by citizen BNA and located at the following address: Land Plot 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, in the amount of 46,045,700 tenge.
Determine the amount of compensation payable to the defendant for the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, owned by citizen BNA and located at the following address: Land Plot 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, on the basis of the report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025, submitted by the defendant, in the amount of 100,640,000 tenge, as well as Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026, according to which the market value of the land plot being alienated was determined to be 75,784,360 tenge, and establish the said amount as the compensation payable to the defendant.
Recover from the claimant in favour of the defendant 700,000 tenge paid for the services of an advocate.

On 26 March 2026, the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region, composed of Presiding Judge Zh. G. Zhumadilova, with Ya. Seyfatova acting as the court hearing secretary, having considered at an open court hearing civil case No. 1952-25-00-2/5853 concerning the claim filed, and guided by Articles 223–226 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan,

RULED:

To partially grant the statement of claim filed by the claimant, the Akim of Karasai District, against the defendant, NA B, for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of a land plot or other real estate for state needs.

To compulsorily alienate for state needs the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, owned by NA B and located at the following address: Land Plot 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, as well as the residential house, canopy, tapchan, outdoor toilet, and green plantings located thereon.

To determine the amount of compensation for the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, owned by NA B and located at the following address: House 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, as well as the registered residential house, canopy, tapchan, fence, and green plantings (apple trees, grapevines, and lilacs), in the amount of one million four hundred ninety thousand six hundred twenty-four tenge.

To deny the remaining claims.

Upon payment of the compensation, to terminate NA B’s right of private ownership to the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, located at the following address: House 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, as well as to the registered residential house, canopy, tapchan, fence, and green plantings located thereon.

To recover from NA B, in favour of the state, the state duty in the amount of 3,932 (three thousand nine hundred thirty-two) tenge.

To recover from NA B, in favour of the state, the costs of conducting the examination in the amount of 131,403.02 (one hundred thirty-one thousand four hundred three) tenge and 02 tiyn.

Disagreeing with the decision of the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region dated 26 March 2026, the defendant filed an appeal on the following grounds.

On 26 March 2026 (the date on which the decision was prepared in its final form was 12 April 2026), the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region, presided over by Judge Zh. G. Zhumadilova, with the participation of the claimant’s representative, A. Kalieva (hereinafter referred to as the “civil claimant”), the defendant, N. A. B (hereinafter referred to as the “civil defendant”), and the defendant’s representative, G. T. Sarzhanov, having considered civil case No. 1952-25-00-2/5853 concerning a claim for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of a land plot or other real estate for state needs, and guided by Articles 223–226 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan,

RULED:

To determine the amount of compensation for the land plot with a total area of 0.0600 hectares and cadastral number 03-047-097-2557, owned by NA B and located at the following address: House 26/39, Quarter 13, Village K, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, as well as the registered residential house, canopy, tapchan, fence, and green plantings (four apple trees, grapevines, lilacs, and roses), in the amount of 52,490,624 (fifty-two million four hundred ninety thousand six hundred twenty-four) tenge.

To deny the remaining claims.

To recover from NA B, in favour of the state, the state duty in the amount of 3,932 (three thousand nine hundred thirty-two) tenge.

To recover from NA B, in favour of the state, the costs of conducting the examination in the amount of 131,403.02 (one hundred thirty-one thousand four hundred three) tenge and 02 tiyn.

We consider the decision of the court of first instance to be unlawful and unfounded for the following reasons.

According to Article 223 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a judicial act of a court of first instance resolving a case on its merits shall be issued in the form of a judgment. The judgment in its final form must be prepared no later than five working days after the announcement of its operative part.

However, this provision was violated: the court judgment was announced on 26 March 2026, whereas it was prepared in its final form on 12 April 2026.

In its judgment, the court stated that the defendant, N. A. B, is the owner of a land plot with an area of 0.0600 hectares and a residential house with an area of 153.0 square metres located thereon.

Furthermore, the judgment states that, for the construction of the Ryskulov Highway, a corresponding decision was adopted by Resolution No. 232 of the Akimat of Karasai District dated 18 July 2019, “On the Compulsory Alienation of Land Plots for State Needs, Including by Way of Buyout,” on the basis of documents submitted by the state institution “Department of Passenger Transport and Highways of Almaty Region,” as well as the land-use schedule and cartographic materials provided by a subdivision of the State Corporation “Government for Citizens.” There are no free land plots in Karasai District; therefore, it is impossible to provide the defendant with an equivalent land plot.

In this regard, the claimant commissioned a valuation of the disputed land plot. According to the Real Estate Valuation Report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, the market value of the land plot and residential house subject to buyout amounted to 46,045,700 tenge.

Since the defendant did not agree with the stated value, the claimant applied to the court seeking the compulsory alienation of the land plot owned by the defendant, determining its value at the above-mentioned amount.

The defendant did not submit a written response to the court.

Furthermore, in its judgment, the court stated that the defendant had requested the appointment of a forensic commodity examination in order to determine the market value of the land plot owned by the defendant.

On 30 January 2026, the court issued a ruling appointing a forensic commodity examination.

According to Expert Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, issued by an expert of the Institute of Forensic Examinations for the City of Almaty of the Republican State Enterprise on the Right of Economic Management “Centre for Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan,” the market value of the land plot owned by the defendant, the residential house located thereon, the canopy, tapchan, outdoor toilet, fence, and green plantings may amount to 52,490,624 tenge.

The court concluded that, during the court hearing, the defendant and the defendant’s representative had partially agreed with the claim but had entirely disagreed with the market value of the land plot and residential house stated in the valuation report submitted by the claimant, had expressed disagreement with the forensic examination report, and had supported the valuation report submitted by the defendant.

According to Article 224 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a court judgment must be lawful and well-founded and must be based solely on evidence submitted by the parties and examined during the court hearing.

In its judgment, the presiding judge stated:

The defendant did not submit a written response to the court;
The defendant applied to the court requesting the appointment of a forensic commodity examination to determine the market value of the land plot owned by the defendant.

The above arguments are unfounded.

During the court proceedings, at the stage of preliminary court proceedings, the defendant and the defendant’s legal representative submitted an objection to the statement of claim dated 12 March 2026 at 11:28 a.m., document No. 191952907011824 (unique document number). The following documents were attached to the objection:

Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026;
Report No. 413 of the valuation company “Assessment Group ‘Baqyt’” dated 2 December 2025.

The said documents were sent to a group created in the WhatsApp application and read out during the court hearing, and their contents were also brought to the court’s attention.

Furthermore, during the proceedings, on 29 January 2026, the defendant and the defendant’s legal representative submitted a motion to the court through the “Judicial Office,” under No. 191952906805426 (unique document number), in which the following documents were identified:

Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026;
Report No. 413 of the valuation company “Assessment Group ‘Baqyt’” dated 2 December 2025.

The defendant asked the court to attach the specialists’ examinations commissioned on the defendant’s initiative to the civil case file as additional evidence.

One of the circumstances that causes bewilderment is the court’s assertion that the defendant had requested the appointment of a forensic commodity examination to determine the market value of the land plot owned by the defendant. This argument cannot withstand any criticism and is false.

During the court hearing, in connection with the submission by the defendant of the defendant’s own commission specialists’ opinion, the defendant categorically objected to the appointment of an additional examination and asked the court not to appoint one.

Article 226 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan provides that a court judgment consists of introductory, descriptive, reasoning, and operative parts. The descriptive part of the judgment must set out a brief summary of the claimant’s claims, the explanations of the defendant and third parties participating in the case, and indicate the evidence on which they base their arguments.

By grossly violating this provision, the court failed to comply with the requirements of the law when recording the documents submitted, attributed statements to the parties that they had not made, and deliberately failed to mention the evidence submitted by the defendant in the descriptive and reasoning parts of the judgment, without assessing that evidence.

As regards the circumstances of the civil case considered by the court of first instance, due to the absence of free land plots in Karasai District and the impossibility of providing an equivalent land plot, the claimant determined the market value of the land plot subject to buyout at 46,045,700 tenge in accordance with the Real Estate Valuation Report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68.

We disagree with the claimant’s arguments regarding the need for the court to determine the value of the land plot at 46,045,700 tenge for the following reasons.

In view of the above circumstances, the defendant submitted a report on the valuation of the market value of the house and land plot dated 2 December 2025, No. 413, prepared by Limited Liability Partnership “Assessment Group ‘Baqyt’,” according to which the market value of the house and land plot located at the following address: House 26/39, Quarter 13, Koksay Village, Irgeli Rural District, Karasai District, Almaty Region, in connection with compulsory alienation for state needs, amounted to 100,640,000 tenge.

For the purpose of simplifying the court proceedings, the defendant indicated the following:

The valuation report submitted to the court by the claimant — 46,045,700 tenge;

The report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025, submitted to the court by the defendant — 100,640,000 tenge.

Pursuant to Article 88 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, under which an expert examination is conducted by a single expert or by a commission of experts, and a commission examination is appointed where complex expert investigations are required and is conducted by at least two experts of the same specialisation, the defendant approached Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” with a request to conduct a specialised commission construction and commodity examination.

The examination was conducted by the following experts/specialists:

On 23 January 2026, Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” issued Specialists’ Opinion No. 2, in which the experts were asked the following questions:

What is the market value of the land plot, excluding buildings, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39?
What is the market value of the residential house, utility and other structures, as well as fences?
What is the market value of the green plantings located on the land plot at the above address?
What is the cost of possible expenses associated with the seizure of the real estate located at the above address?

The specialists reached the following conclusions regarding these questions:

The market value of the land plot, excluding buildings, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 20,916,000 tenge.
The market value of the residential house, utility and other structures, as well as fences, located at the following address: City of Almaty, Karasai District, Irgeli Rural District, Village K, K Street, House 26/39, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 53,512,196 tenge.
The market value of the green plantings located on the land plot at the address indicated above, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 291,486 tenge.
The cost of possible expenses (losses) associated with the seizure of the real estate located at the address indicated above, as of the date of the examination, may amount to 1,064,678 tenge.

Total: 75,784,360 tenge.

On 30 January 2026, in the civil case initiated on the claim of the Akim of Karasai District against the defendant, NA B, for the compulsory alienation of a land plot for state needs, the court issued a ruling appointing a forensic commodity examination.

The experts were asked the following question:

According to Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, expert/specialist A. G. Zholseitova concluded that the market value of the fence, the residential house with an area of 153 square metres, the outdoor toilet, the tapchan, the canopy, and the planted vegetation (rose bushes and thuja trees) located on the land plot may amount to 52,490,624 tenge.

Methods of the comparative approach:

Comparative analysis method — determining value by comparing recent sales and asking prices of movable property objects comparable to the object being valued, after making appropriate adjustments to account for the differences between them;
Market information method — determining the value of movable property using information on asking prices published in the price lists of manufacturers, dealers, or other sources of information on asking prices;
Statistical modelling method — considering the object being valued as a representative of a certain group of homogeneous objects whose prices are known, where that group contains no exact analogue of the object being valued. After adjusting the prices of comparable objects to uniform conditions on the basis of information about similar objects included in such a group, a mathematical model of the dependence of price on one or more parameters is developed using statistical methods;
Correlation models method — a mathematical model of the dependence of price on one or more parameters. On the basis of this model, taking into account the parameters of each object being valued, the calculated value of the objects being valued is determined.

However, the report under review does not provide justification for the adjustments (adjustment coefficients) applied when calculating the value using the comparative approach.

No assessment was carried out of the damage caused to the owner of the residential house and land plot.

Calculation of Actual Damage

Actual damage includes:

expenses associated with moving to a new place;
expenses associated with registering rights to a new real estate property;
real estate agent fees;
expenses for renting property while searching for real estate to replace the property being alienated (temporary storage of property).

Expenses associated with the services of an advocate (lawyer). Payment for an advocate’s services is an expense borne by the owner.

According to Paragraph 13 of Regulatory Resolution No. 8 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 25 December 2006, “On Certain Issues of the Application by Courts of Legislation on the Compulsory Alienation of Land Plots for State Needs,” when resolving disputes concerning the determination of the amount of monetary compensation, courts shall resolve all issues concerning compensation for losses caused to the owner by the termination of ownership rights in connection with the compulsory alienation of a land plot for state needs. In this regard, the property shall be valued on the basis of its market value, except in the cases provided for by Paragraph 2 of Article 67 of the Law “On State Property.”

During the court hearing, the court did not resolve the issue of calculating the expenses and losses submitted by the defendant and did not provide a legal assessment of them in its judgment.

Honourable Court, we disagree with the valuation report of Limited Liability Partnership “Dom Otsenki” dated 17 October 2025, No. 1480/25/ALM-68, and Forensic Examination Report No. 4027 dated 3 March 2026, because we believe that the valuation in the said documents was conducted inadequately and without objectivity.

The properties compared by the expert do not correspond to the dimensions of the defendant’s land plot and residential house, because the selected properties are significantly smaller in area.

In this regard, the defendant submitted the following documents to the court:

Report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025 — 100,640,000 tenge;

Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026 — 75,784,360 tenge.

We consider this report reliable and fair, and the market value stated therein to correspond to the actual market value of the real estate being alienated.

On the basis of the foregoing arguments, the report on the valuation of the market value of the house No. 413 dated 2 December 2025, in the amount of 100,640,000 tenge, and Specialists’ Opinion No. 2 of Limited Liability Partnership “Centre for Expertise and Valuation” dated 23 January 2026, in the amount of 75,784,360 tenge, must be taken into account by the court.

The amount stated in this report should be fairly accepted as the actual market value of the real estate being alienated.

Expenses associated with the services of an advocate (lawyer) are expenses borne by the owner.

In accordance with Articles 401, 402, 403, and 404 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an appeal may be filed against court decisions that have not entered into legal force. The right to appeal a court decision belongs to the parties and other persons participating in the case. The appeal is considered by a judicial panel for civil cases of a regional court or an equivalent court, sitting as a panel of at least three judges. An appeal shall be filed through the court that issued the decision. An appeal may be filed within one month from the date on which the decision is prepared in its final form, and by persons who did not participate in the court proceedings, within one month from the date on which a copy of the decision is sent to them.

On the basis of the foregoing, and pursuant to Articles 401, 402, 403, and 404 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan,

WE ASK THE COURT TO:

Grant the defendant’s appeal against the decision of the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region dated 26 March 2026.
Amend the court decision dated 26 March 2026 in the claim filed by the claimant for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of the land plot and residential house for state needs, and set aside the court decision insofar as it determines the value of the land plot and residential house subject to buyout at 52,490,624 tenge.
Establish the amount of monetary compensation payable to the defendant for the compulsory alienation (buyout) of the land plot and residential house for state needs at 75,784,360 tenge.
Recover from the claimant in favour of the defendant 700,000 tenge paid for the services of an advocate.

On 30 June 2026, the Judicial Panel for Civil Cases of the Almaty Regional Court, composed of Presiding Judge S. S. Tashpolatov and panel judges S. A. Kurbanova and N. Zh. Zhekenova, with A. Kazymbet acting as the court hearing secretary, having considered civil case No. 1999-26-00-2a/1592 at an open court hearing using audio and video recording facilities,

RESOLVED:

To leave unchanged the decision of the Karasai District Court of Almaty Region dated 26 March 2026.

To dismiss the defendant BNA’s appeal.

The ruling shall enter into legal force on the date of its announcement.

Attention!

Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.

For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.

Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases Declaration Decree Order Resolution Decision Report Conclusion Statement Conclusion Convention Contract Memorandum Methodology Norms Note Rules Program Charter Charter Article Commentary Resolution Regulations Protocol Draft Program Rules Messages

Article 28. Acquisition of property rights in case of compulsory alienation of property for State needs of the Law on State Property

6 November 2024

Article 28. Acquisition of property rights in case of compulsory alienation of property for State needs of the Law on State Property 1. Acquisition by the state (the Republic...