Another court decision against Mehmet Tatlici has emerged. The readers of Tatlıcı Facts have been following closely all the things Mehmet Tatlici had done against his late father, his precious memory and his heritage and how justice was served against these acts with all the consequences by the help of related news. A new one has been added to these.
A court decision was enacted for his eviction from the villa inherited from his late father against Mehmet Tatlici who had unjustly continued to get rental income from the estates inherited from his late father about whom he filed a denunciation to prosecutor’s office and to live in luxury at villa numbered C74 at Beykoz Estates which is one of these 576 m2 houses for years.
PREVIOUS ACTS OF MEHMET TATLICI
Mehmet Tatlici was so impatient about taking action for the heritage procedures that he prepared a fax message before his father’s death, to which he added the date of his death later by hand, and faxed it to the banks at 04:29 in the morning, only 11 hours after his father’s death when his father Salih Tatlıcı’s funeral ceremony has not been held and his body was not buried yet. (See the news, “The Fax Message Sent to the Banks Right After Death”)
Mehmet Tatlici had filed lawsuits for the annulment of testament and action for making the inventory of the estate as he did not like the distribution of property ordered by his late father Mehmet Salih Tatlıcı in his testament.
Apart from that, Mehmet Tatlici “informed” Smuggling Department of the Chief Public Prosecutor of Istanbul against his deceased birth father with regard to the paintings and antiques inherited from the deceased. (See the news “Oğul: Müşteki – Merhum Baba: Şüpheli”)
Mehmet Tatlici has made 12 groundless denunciations all of which have been resolved with non-prosecution or rejection against his father’s second wife Nurten Tatlıcı and his brother Uğur Tatlıcı who was born of this marriage and as a result a lawsuit was filed against Mehmet Tatlici with the plea for 16 years of imprisonment due to slander. (See the news, “Mehmet Tatlici Completed The Dozen”)
Mehmet Tatlici has also pressed charges against the business center named Tat Towers in Istanbul Zincirlikuyu, for the construction of which his late father spent great efforts, with the accusation of being unlicensed and vulnerable to earthquakes. On the other hand, he tried to commercialise and sell these same buildings (although he did not have such a legal right or authority on these buildings). (See the news, “Mehmet Tatlıcı Oyununu Nasıl Oynuyor?”)
OWES ALL HE HAS TO HIS FATHER
All that Mehmet Tatlici has today was inherited from his late father.
While pressing charges against his father’s testament, this dutiful child has also tried to obtain rental income from the estates inherited from his father against order and law and sent notifications to the tenants. (See the news, “Baba Parası…Baba Sevgisi…” )
WHY DID THE COURT EVICTED MEHMET TATLICI FROM THE VILLA HE LIVED IN?
Mehmet Tatlici had filed lawsuits for the annulment of testament and action for making the inventory of the estate as he did not like the division of property ordered by his late father in his testament. Thus, management of most of the estates including the villa where Mehmet Tatlici continued to live after his father’s death and control over the income obtained from these were in possession of the court of probate.
In fact, Mehmet Tatlici’s living in that villa, which was under control and administration of court of probate, or his having any possession of the villa was against the law. However, while this dutiful child was doing as much harm as possible to his late father and his inheritance, interestingly enough he was also enjoying the inheritance of the deceased.
Finally, by the verdict enacted on October 3rd, 2013 1st Civil Court of First Instance of Istanbul, Beykoz District decided that Mehmet Tatlici’s interference with the villa at Beykoz Estates, which he had unjustly occupied for years, shall be prevented and he shall pay a fee of 186.000 Turkish Liras to the public treasury.
We are enclosing the corresponding court verdict attached for the information of our readers.