An owner discovering that their apartment, land, villa or commercial property in Turkey has been sold without their genuine consent faces one of the most serious forms of property dispute. The fact that a new owner has already been registered at the Land Registry does not necessarily mean that the original owner has permanently lost the property.

Under Turkish law, an unauthorized property sale may potentially be challenged through a title deed cancellation and registration action (tapu iptali ve tescil davası). Whether the property can actually be recovered, however, depends on how the unauthorized transfer occurred, whether a power of attorney existed, whether documents were forged, whether the purchaser acted in good faith and whether the property was subsequently transferred to another person.

The most important rule is therefore simple:

Not every unauthorized property sale is legally the same.

A sale carried out with a completely forged power of attorney must be distinguished from a sale made by a genuinely authorized representative who abused that authority. Likewise, both situations must be distinguished from a sale personally executed by the registered owner under fraud, mistake or coercion.

The legal basis of the claim determines the remedy.

1. What Is an “Unauthorized Property Sale” Under Turkish Law?

An unauthorized property sale can arise in several different ways.

The most obvious example is where someone purports to represent the property owner despite having no legal authority at all. The person may use a forged power of attorney, an invalid authorization document or another false document to transfer the property.

Turkish Code of Obligations Article 46 regulates unauthorized representation. Where a person concludes a legal transaction as a representative without having authority, the transaction binds the person allegedly represented only if that person subsequently approves it.

Accordingly, if an owner never granted authority to sell the property and does not subsequently approve the transaction, the purported representative cannot ordinarily create a binding contractual obligation against the owner merely by claiming to act on their behalf.

This can become the starting point for challenging the resulting land registry entry.

2. A Power of Attorney Must Specifically Authorize the Sale of Real Estate

Turkish law imposes particularly strict requirements concerning authority to transfer immovable property.

Article 504 of the Turkish Code of Obligations states that an agent cannot transfer an immovable property or create a right restricting it unless the agent has been specifically authorized to do so.

This means that possession of a broad or general power of attorney does not automatically mean that the attorney is authorized to sell the principal’s property.

The actual contents of the power of attorney must therefore be reviewed.

In an unauthorized property transfer dispute, one of the first documents that should be obtained is the power of attorney allegedly used in the transaction. The lawyer must determine whether it is genuine, whether it was valid on the date of the transaction and whether it contained sufficient authority to dispose of the particular property.

3. Forged Power of Attorney and Complete Absence of Authority

The strongest form of unauthorized transfer arises where the property owner never issued the power of attorney at all.

For example, a person may obtain identification details belonging to a property owner and create or use false documentation to arrange the transfer of the property.

If the representative had no authority, Article 46 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides that the transaction does not bind the purported principal unless it is subsequently approved.

Where such an invalid transaction nevertheless results in a land registry entry, the rules concerning unlawful registration (yolsuz tescil) become relevant.

Article 1024 of the Turkish Civil Code states that a registration based on a non-binding legal transaction or lacking a valid legal basis is unlawful. A person who knows or should know that the registration is unlawful cannot rely on it.

Consequently, the original owner may have grounds to seek cancellation of the defective registration and restoration of title.

However, matters become more complicated if the property has subsequently been transferred to another person.

4. Abuse of a Genuine Power of Attorney Is a Different Legal Problem

A very common dispute arises where the owner genuinely gave another person authority to sell the property, but that representative later abused the authority.

For example, an owner living abroad may give a relative, business partner or professional representative authority to sell an apartment.

Instead of acting in the owner’s interests, the representative may sell the property:

to themselves or a relative;

for a substantially artificial or nominal price;

without paying the sale proceeds to the owner;

to a person cooperating with the representative;

or under circumstances clearly contrary to the owner’s instructions.

This is generally examined as abuse of the power of attorney (vekalet görevinin kötüye kullanılması).

The Court of Cassation expressly recognizes title deed cancellation and registration actions based on abuse of a power of attorney.

But an important distinction applies.

Where the representative actually possessed authority to carry out the transaction, abuse of that authority may initially concern the internal relationship between the principal and agent. If the purchaser contracting with the agent genuinely acted in good faith, the consequences can differ substantially from a transaction in which the purchaser knew or should have known that the agent was abusing the principal’s interests. The Court of Cassation’s decisions specifically examine whether the purchaser knew or should have known about the abuse.

Therefore, in an abuse-of-authority case, proving the relationship between the representative and the purchaser may be just as important as proving the representative’s misconduct.

5. What If the Buyer Knew About the Unauthorized Scheme?

Bad faith on the part of the purchaser can fundamentally alter the dispute.

Article 1024 of the Turkish Civil Code provides that a person who knows or should know that an existing registration is unlawful cannot rely upon that registration.

Evidence suggesting bad faith may therefore become highly important.

For example, the court may have to examine whether there was an unusually close relationship between the representative and purchaser, whether the price was suspiciously low, whether payment actually occurred, whether the purchaser knew the owner’s intentions, whether the purchaser was aware of a dispute and whether the circumstances of the transaction should reasonably have raised doubts.

No single circumstance automatically proves bad faith. The overall factual picture must be assessed.

6. The Biggest Risk: A Subsequent Good-Faith Purchaser

One of the most important principles of Turkish land registry law is contained in Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code.

It provides protection, under the statutory conditions, to a third person who acquires ownership or another real right in good faith by relying on the registration appearing in the Land Registry.

This rule is extremely important in unauthorized property-sale cases.

Assume that Owner A loses the property through an unlawful transaction and B becomes registered as owner.

If B remains the registered owner, A may seek cancellation of B’s defective title where the legal conditions are satisfied.

But suppose B subsequently sells the property to C.

If C knew or should have known that B’s title was defective, C cannot automatically rely on the registration because Article 1024 excludes protection for a person who is not in good faith.

On the other hand, if C satisfies the statutory requirements for protection as a good-faith third party under Article 1023, C’s acquisition may be protected.

This is why unauthorized property transfers require immediate legal action.

Every subsequent transfer can make restoration of the property more legally complicated.

7. Title Deed Cancellation and Registration Action

Where an unauthorized or legally defective transaction has caused another person to become registered as owner, the principal remedy may be a title deed cancellation and registration action.

The claimant essentially asks the court to determine that the defendant’s registration cannot legally be maintained, cancel that registration and restore ownership to the claimant.

Article 1025 of the Turkish Civil Code provides the statutory mechanism for correction of the land register where a real right has been affected by an unlawful registration. The relationship between Articles 1023, 1024 and 1025 is therefore central to these disputes. The courts must determine both whether the registration was defective and whether any subsequent person’s acquisition deserves good-faith protection.

A title deed cancellation case should therefore identify the precise legal defect rather than simply stating that the owner did not want the sale.

8. An Interim Injunction May Be Crucial

If the property is still registered in the name of the person involved in the disputed transaction, one of the most urgent issues is preventing another transfer.

For example, the new registered owner may attempt to sell the property, mortgage it or transfer it to another person while litigation is pending.

In such circumstances, the claimant may seek an interim injunction (ihtiyati tedbir) restricting transactions concerning the disputed property.

This can be strategically critical because the legal position may change if another purchaser enters the ownership chain and invokes good-faith protection under Article 1023.

Therefore, in many unauthorized-sale cases, the first practical objective is not merely filing the title cancellation lawsuit but also preserving the existing ownership position until the court determines the dispute.

9. What Evidence Is Important?

These cases are usually determined by documentary and transactional evidence rather than by the owner’s statement alone.

Particularly important material includes the complete historical land registry record, official deed transaction documents, the power of attorney used during the transfer, notarial records concerning the power of attorney, bank records showing whether a genuine purchase price was paid, records showing where the money went, correspondence between the representative and purchaser, WhatsApp messages, e-mails, company or family connections between the parties, expert examinations concerning signatures or documents and any related criminal investigation file.

The relationship between the purchaser and representative can be particularly significant in cases based on abuse of a power of attorney because the purchaser’s good or bad faith may determine whether the transfer can be challenged successfully.

10. What If the Signature or Power of Attorney Was Forged?

Forgery substantially changes the nature of the case.

If the owner’s signature, power of attorney or another official document was forged, the matter may involve both civil and criminal proceedings.

The criminal investigation may examine offences such as document forgery and fraud depending on the factual circumstances. Meanwhile, the civil proceedings focus on whether the resulting transfer created a valid title and whether the registration should be cancelled.

A criminal complaint does not automatically restore ownership.

Likewise, the owner should not necessarily wait for the entire criminal process to finish before evaluating civil measures. The risk that the property will be transferred again must be considered separately.

The civil and criminal strategies should therefore be coordinated.

11. What If the Property Has Already Been Sold Several Times?

A chain of transfers makes the legal analysis considerably more complicated.

The lawyer must identify each transfer chronologically and determine the legal position of every transferee.

The first defective transaction does not necessarily produce the same result for every subsequent purchaser.

Article 1023 protects qualifying good-faith third-party acquisitions, while Article 1024 prevents persons who knew or should have known about an unlawful registration from relying upon it.

Consequently, the decisive defendant may not always be only the person who initially arranged the unauthorized transfer.

The complete title history must be reviewed.

12. Can the Owner Claim Compensation If the Property Cannot Be Recovered?

Yes, depending on the circumstances.

If restoration of the property itself becomes impossible—for example because the rights of a legally protected third-party purchaser intervene—the original owner may need to pursue monetary claims against the persons responsible for the loss.

Claims may potentially be directed against an unauthorized representative, fraudulent participant or other liable person depending on the legal relationship.

Article 47 of the Turkish Code of Obligations also regulates the liability arising from unauthorized representation where the represented person does not approve the transaction.

There may additionally be exceptional circumstances in which state liability arising from the maintenance of the land registry must be examined.

Article 1007 of the Turkish Civil Code provides that the State is responsible for damage arising from the maintenance of the land registry and may recourse against officials at fault. The Constitutional Court’s published decisions repeatedly refer to this statutory rule.

However, Article 1007 should not be treated as an automatic compensation mechanism for every fraudulent property sale. Whether the loss legally results from the maintenance of the land register and whether the conditions for State liability are satisfied must be assessed separately.

13. Does a Very Low Sale Price Automatically Cancel the Transfer?

No.

The mere fact that the property was sold below market value does not automatically make the title transfer void.

However, a dramatically low price can become important evidence when considered together with other circumstances.

For example, if an agent sells a property worth EUR 500,000 to a close relative for EUR 50,000, no meaningful payment can be identified and the owner receives none of the proceeds, those circumstances may contribute to an allegation that the representative abused their authority and that the purchaser knew or should have known about the misconduct.

The analysis is therefore based on the overall circumstances rather than price alone.

14. Can a Foreign Property Owner Bring the Same Claims?

Foreign ownership does not itself prevent a person from challenging an unauthorized transfer of property located in Turkey.

A foreign owner whose Turkish property was transferred without authorization may pursue available remedies under Turkish property law.

In practice, these disputes frequently arise where owners reside abroad and conduct Turkish real estate transactions through powers of attorney.

This makes verification of the original power of attorney especially important.

The lawyer should determine where the document was issued, whether it was notarized or issued through a Turkish consulate, whether it contains specific authority to transfer immovable property and whether it remained valid at the time of the transaction.

15. Where Is the Lawsuit Filed?

Because a title deed cancellation and registration action directly concerns rights over immovable property, territorial jurisdiction is generally connected to the location of the property.

The competent court and exact cause of action should nevertheless be determined according to the legal relationship and the relief requested.

A typical unauthorized-sale case may therefore require an action before the competent civil court where the property is located, accompanied where necessary by an interim injunction application.

16. What Should the Property Owner Do Immediately?

The first stage should be evidence preservation and title investigation.

The complete land registry history should be obtained immediately. The alleged power of attorney and official sale documents should then be reviewed.

It should be established whether the person who conducted the transaction had no authority at all or possessed genuine authority but abused it.

The current owner of the property must also be identified.

If there is a risk of another transfer, interim protection should be considered urgently.

Finally, the financial trail should be investigated: Was a purchase price actually paid? Who received it? Was it transferred to the original owner? What relationship exists between the representative and purchaser?

These questions often determine whether the appropriate claim is based on unauthorized representation, abuse of power of attorney, fraudulent conduct, unlawful registration or another legal ground.

Conclusion: An Unauthorized Sale Does Not Necessarily Mean the Property Is Lost Forever

Turkish law provides strong protection to the security of the land registry, but it does not treat every registered transfer as untouchable.

Where a property has been transferred through a forged power of attorney, lack of authority, abuse of authority or another legally defective transaction, the original owner may potentially seek cancellation of the title deed and restoration of ownership.

The most important legal provisions include Article 46 of the Turkish Code of Obligations concerning unauthorized representation, Article 504 concerning the special authority required for transfers of immovable property, and Articles 1023–1025 of the Turkish Civil Code governing good-faith acquisitions and unlawful land registrations.

However, timing is critical.

If the property remains in the hands of a person who participated in the defective transaction, recovery may be considerably more straightforward than where it has already passed to a qualifying good-faith third party.

For that reason, an owner who discovers an unauthorized property transfer should immediately obtain the land registry records, investigate the underlying documents and consider both a title deed cancellation and registration lawsuit and appropriate interim measures designed to prevent further transfers.