Validity and Deadline Control — Eviction Commitment
A written eviction undertaking (tahliye taahhüdü) can carry a very specific procedural consequence in Turkish residential and roofed-workplace leasing, so its dates must be treated as legal control data rather than archive labels. Article 352 of the Turkish Code of Obligations states that if, after delivery of the leased property, the tenant undertakes in writing to vacate on a specified date but does not do so, the lessor may seek termination by initiating enforcement or filing a lawsuit within one month from that agreed vacate date. A transaction file should therefore test the document, the chronology and the deadline together.
First establish whether the document fits the statutory route
Do not start with the assumption that every paper titled 'eviction commitment' has the effect contemplated by Article 352. Record the identity of the tenant and lessor, the exact leased property, the date the premises were delivered, the date the undertaking was signed, the stated vacate date and the signatures. The statutory wording refers to an undertaking made after delivery, so the chronology is material. If the date, signature, delivery sequence or identity of the premises is disputed, the file should flag that dispute instead of describing the instrument as unquestionably enforceable.
Keep the original or a reliable authenticated copy together with the lease and delivery evidence. A scan that omits the signature page, a form with blanks, or a version circulated by messaging application should not be treated as equivalent to a complete evidentiary file without further verification. Where there are several tenants or a representative signed, check who is bound and what authority supported the signature.
Control the one-month action period
The agreed vacate date is the central trigger for the Article 352 route. If the tenant remains after that date, the file should immediately calculate the one-month period in which the lessor may apply for enforcement or file the relevant action under the statutory provision. Record the start date, the proposed last day, the procedural step actually taken and evidence of the filing or application. Do not merely write 'deadline met'; preserve the dated document that proves it.
Calendar calculations can become contentious around service, filing method, public holidays or other procedural facts, so a transaction team should avoid inventing its own legal extension. If the one-month period is close, disputed or apparently missed, obtain legal review promptly. The key due-diligence point is that an old undertaking is not an indefinitely open right to remove the tenant whenever a future buyer wishes.
Distinguish validity from current usefulness
A document may be genuine and historically important but no longer provide the procedural leverage that a seller claims. For example, if the stated vacate date passed long ago and no timely step is evidenced, the buyer should not price the property on the assumption that the old undertaking guarantees rapid vacancy. Conversely, where timely enforcement or litigation was initiated, the current procedural file, objections, court or enforcement status and any settlement become the relevant evidence rather than the paper alone.
Also separate the undertaking from other eviction grounds. Non-payment, landlord need, redevelopment, two justified notices and other statutory routes have their own conditions. The existence of a tahliye taahhüdü does not convert every occupancy problem into an Article 352 case. A clean record identifies which legal route is actually being relied on and does not mix their deadlines.
Recheck before a sale that assumes vacant delivery
When a sale contract, escrow condition or payment schedule assumes that the property will be delivered vacant, refresh the eviction-commitment status close to signing and again before closing. Confirm whether the tenant is still in possession, whether keys have been delivered, whether proceedings remain active, whether any objection or settlement changed the expected date and whether the seller still relies on the same document.
If the tenant has left voluntarily, preserve a signed handover or another reliable possession record and inspect the property. Once actual surrender is complete, the transaction risk becomes one of proving handover rather than calculating a future eviction deadline. If the tenant remains, describe the position accurately as an ongoing legal or possession risk instead of converting an expected result into a completed fact.
Evidence standard for the final file
The final control note should contain the lease, delivery evidence, undertaking, all relevant dates, the Article 352 source checked, any enforcement or court reference, service evidence, mediation documents where applicable, and the latest possession confirmation. It should also state which fact is verified and which is still an assumption. That distinction is essential when another reviewer later reconstructs the transaction.
Validity-and-deadline control is therefore not a yes-or-no label attached to the document. It is a chronology test. The undertaking must be connected to the post-delivery lease history, the specified vacate date must be identified precisely, the one-month procedural window must be tracked, and any later development must be incorporated before someone relies on the instrument for pricing, closing or vacant-possession planning.