The court decision was changed due to the fact that the damage caused and the state duty were collected not from the owner of the disputed land plot, but from the person acting on his behalf
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants - A., N., The Department of land relations of the South Kazakhstan region, the Department of Justice of the South Kazakhstan region, the private notary zh., requesting to invalidate the purchase and sale agreement, its state registration, return the funds paid for the land plot and recover moral damage. By the decision of the Abay District Court of Shymkent dated January 25, 2013, the claim was partially satisfied. Acting on behalf of N. A. the contract for the purchase and sale of a land plot and its state registration, concluded on February 8, 2008 between Sh. The parties to the case are restored to their original state. In favor of the plaintiff sh. from the defendant A. 840,000 tenge and 10,768 tenge of state duty were collected. The other part of the claim is dismissed. The Appellate Judicial Board for civil and administrative cases of the South Kazakhstan regional court left the court's decision unchanged. The Cassation Judicial Board of the South Kazakhstan regional court left the court decision and the decision of the Appellate Judicial Board unchanged. The representative of A.-D., due to the incorrect application of the norms of material and procedural Law, asked to cancel the disputed judicial acts and make a new decision on the satisfaction of the claim. Hearing D.'s understanding in support of the application, the conclusion of the prosecutor, who partially satisfied the application, changed the court's decision and asked for a new decision in the amended part, checked the documents of the civil case and the motives of the application, the supervisory Judicial Board of the Supreme Court concluded that the application is subject to satisfaction due to the following grounds. In accordance with article 387 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the IIC), a significant violation of material norms or procedural law is the basis for reviewing decisions, rulings, decisions of the court that have entered into legal force in the order of supervision. In this case, such violations were committed. The defendant acting on behalf of N. A. on February 8, 2008, under a purchase and sale agreement certified by a notary zh., a land plot No. 374, Cadastral number 19-309-063-6927, with an area of 0.0800 hectares, located in Shymkent, was sold by the plaintiff to Sh. for 840,000 tenge. This agreement has been state registered with the Department of Justice of South Kazakhstan region. An act confirming the right of private ownership of a land plot is issued in the name of sh. When the courts satisfied the claim and collected 840,000 tenge from A. in favor of the plaintiff, the disputed land plot was legalized in the name of N. by the decision of the Commission for the legalization of real estate of the akimat of Shymkent dated August 16, 2007 No. 61781, but the Act granting the right of private ownership of the land plot was false. According to the notification of the Shymkent city land cadastre Branch No. 9633, it is impossible to determine the boundaries of this land plot, since the land plot No. 374 in the Yntymak microdistrict of Shymkent is not registered in the unified state land plot and Archive Department of the branch.
The court decision was changed due to the fact that the damage caused and the state duty were collected not from the owner of the disputed land plot, but from the person acting on his behalf
However, the supervisory board does not agree with these conclusions of the courts and considers that the circle of circumstances relevant to the case is incorrectly determined. Because, as it turned out at the court session, A. transferred the car of the "Daiwoo" brand belonging to him to N., and N. transferred the disputed land plot to A. with a power of attorney certified by a notary. These circumstances were not denied by the parties in court. It was also established that the buyer purchased the disputed land without visiting it, in accordance with the documents specified by B. In such a context of the case, judicial acts are subject to change due to an incorrect definition of the circle of circumstances relevant to the case. The supervisory judicial board amended the judicial acts in relation to the civil case and made a new decision, canceling the part of the judicial acts in favor of the plaintiff sh. from the defendant A. from 840,000 (eight hundred and forty thousand) tenge and 10,768 (ten thousand seven hundred and sixty-eight) tenge collected state duty. In favor of the plaintiff sh., the owner of the land plot collected from N. a state duty of 840,000 (eight hundred and forty thousand) tenge and 10,768 (ten thousand seven hundred and sixty-eight) tenge.
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.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
