R.Sh. lived in the apartment in Tbilisi together with his niece Gia Sh., his wife G.Sh. and their son G.Sh. Gia Sh. was registered in this house since 1984.
G.Sh. was Gia Sh.’s heir of the first line and he had inherited the property of his dead father with the relevant document certifying the fact. Despite the fact that the accommodation was co-owned, R.Sh. presented it to his sister E.Ts.
According to the court estimation, the testimony given by the witnesses were ambiguous, inconsistent and opposite. The court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff had right to demand recognition of his co-possession of the immovable property on the basis of the inheritance law.
The lawyer explained that R.Sh. the full disposal of the arguable property was not legal because the individuals who permanently lived in this apartment also had gained the right of co-possession. In this case, Gia Sh. and his son G.Sh. were such individuals. Accordingly, G.Sh. was entitled to the share from the registered property. On the basis of the above-mentioned, there was a ground to annul the deed of gift.
Finally, the court shared the position of the public lawyer and G.Sh. was found a co-owner of the ½ part of the immobile property.