Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tanah merupakan objek yang selalu saja menjadi rebutan di dalam kehidupan masyarakat, dalam hal pemberian hibah tersebut jarang sekali timbul konflik bagi anggota keluarga yang tidak menerima pembagian karena pada dasarnya hibah adalah pemberian, sehingga pemilik harta tersebut dapat dengan leluasa memberikan hartanya kepada siapapun atas kehendak pemilik harta tersebut. Hibah merupakan sebuah pemberian seseorang kepada pihak lain yang biasanya dilalukan ketika pemberi maupun penerima masih hidup. PPAT memiliki kewenangan dalam pembuat akta tanah adalah melakukansebagian kegiatan pendaftaran tanah dengan membuat akta sebagai hasil kegiatan tersebut beserta buktidilakukannya perbuatan hukum. Pasal 1666 KUHPerdata yang menyatakan bahwa hibah diberikan secara cuma-cuma dan tidak dapat ditarik kembali, maka terdapat pertentangan antara ketentuan peraturan pasal 1666 KUHPerdata dengan putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 3594 K/PDT/2020. Adapun permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah kedudukan akta hibah yang dibuat tanpa pihak yang berwenang dan Peran PPAT terhadap peralihan tanah dan bangunan tanpa pihak yang berwenang (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 3594K/PDT/2020), Akta hibah dalam kasus ini telah cacat yuridis dan oleh karenanya akta hibah tersebut bataldemi hukum, Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian analisis data kualitatif yang dilakukan dengan penelusuran bahan dari data sekunder. Tipe penelitian yang digunakanbersifat ekplanatoris. Analisis didasarkan pada UUJN, KUHPerdata, UUPA, Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 24 Tahun 2016 Tentang Perubahan Atas Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 37 Tahun 1998 Tentang Peraturan Jabatan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah, serta peraturan lain terkait. Hasil analisis adalah Kedudukan akta hibah yang dibuat tanpa pihak yang berwenang, dalam peralihan atau balik nama tersebut haruslah dinyatakan tidak sah dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum yangmengikat, adapun sanksi yang dapat diberikan kepada penghadap yang memberikan keterangan palsu dalam akta autentik adalah ancaman hukuman perdata dan pidana. Ganti rugi atas kerugian yangditimbulkannya terhadap si penderita, dan dapat menempuh jalur hukum ke pihak polisian dengan laporan penggelapan hak atau pemalsuan surat (Pasal 264 KUHPidana) atas kerugian yang dilakukanantara pihak tersebut.

---

Land is an object that has always been a grab in the life of the community, in the case of granting, conflicts rarely arise for family members who do not receive a division because basically a grant is a gift, so that the owner of the property can freely give his property to anyone at the will of the owner of the property. A grant is a gift of a person to another party that is usually passed when the giver or recipient isstill alive. PPAT has the authority in making land deeds to carry out some land registration activities by making deeds as a result of these activities along with evidence of legal actions. Article 1666 of the CivilCode which states that grants are given free of charge and cannot be withdrawn, then there is a conflict between the provisions of the regulations of article 1666 of the Civil Code and the decision of theSupreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3594 K / PDT / 2020." The problems raised in thisstudy are the position of grant deeds made without authorized parties and the role of PPAT on the transfer of land and buildings without authorized parties (Study of the Supreme Court of the Republic ofIndonesia Decision Number 3594 K / PDT / 2020), The grant deed in this case has been juridically defective and therefore the grant deed is null and void, To answer the problem is used qualitative dataanalysis research method carried out by tracing materials from secondary data. The type of research used isexplanatory. The analysis is based on UUJN, Civil Code, UUPA, Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 of 2016 concerning Amendments to Government Regulation Number 37 of1998 concerning Regulations on the Position of Land Deed Making Officers, as well as other relatedregulations. The result of the analysis is The position of the grant deed made without the competentauthority, in the transfer or reversal of the name must be declared invalid and has no binding legal force,while the sanction that can be given to the offender who gives false information in the authentic deed is the threat of civil and criminal penalties. Compensation for the losses it caused to the sufferer, and cantake legal action to the police with a report of embezzlement of rights or forgery of letters (Article 264 of the Criminal Code) for losses made between those parties."

"Jual beli tanah merupakan suatu perbuatan hukum peralihan hak atas tanah dari penjual kepada pembeli dan pada saat yang sama membayar penuh kepada penjual harga yang telah disetujui bersama yang dilaksanakan di hadapan PPAT. Dalam proses pembuatan akta jual beli syarat sah jual beli harus terpenuhi agar tidak terjadinya pembatalan akta jual beli. Salah satu syarat dalam akta jual beli yaitu kewenangan seseorang dalam menjual maupun membeli objek tersebut. Dalam Pasal 1467 KUHPerdata mengatur bahwa antara suami-istri tidak boleh terjadi jual beli. Dalam kasus yang diteliti, untuk melancarkan proses pengalihan hak maka diatur skenario jual beli seolah-olah terjadi proses jual beli antara H kepada MU dan sebulan setelah itu dibeli oleh J (istri H). Adapun permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai tanggung jawab PPAT dalam pembuatan akta jual beli secara terselubung dan menganalisis akibat hukum peralihan hak atas tanah melalui jual beli secara terselubung antara suami istri dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1471 K/Pdt/2020. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian deskriptif analitis. Hasil analisis adalah PPAT dapat dimintai pertanggungjawabannya secara perdata dan administrasi karena PPAT mengetahui adanya perbuatan melawan hukum dalam proses pembuatan AJB dan akibat jual beli yang dibuat tanpa itikad baik maka AJB tersebut dianggap tidak pernah ada. Adapun saran yang dapat diberikan yaitu PPAT dalam menjalankan kewajibannya selalu menerapkan asas kehati-hatian dalam menuangkan keterangan para pihak kedalam sebuah akta terutama dalam memenuhi asas terang dan tunai dalam jual beli.

---

Land sale and purchase is a legal act, namely the transfer of land rights from the seller to the buyer while paying in full to the seller at a mutually agreed price before the PPAT. In the process of making a sale and purchase deed, the legal conditions of sale and purchase must be fulfilled so that there is no cancellation of the sale and purchase deed. One of the conditions in the sale and purchase deed is the authority of a person to sell or buy the object. Article 1467 of the Civil Code stipulates that there must be no sale and purchase between husband and wife. In the case studied, to expedite the process of transferring rights, a sale and purchase scenario is arranged as if there was a sale and purchase between H and MU, and a month after, it was purchased by J (wife of H.) The problems raised in this study are about the responsibility of PPAT in making a covert sale and purchase deed and analyzing the legal consequences of the transfer of land rights through covert sale and purchase between husband and wife in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1471 K/Pdt/2020. A normative juridical research method is used with a descriptive-analytical research type to answer these problems. The result of the analysis is that PPAT can be held accountable in civil and administrative terms because PPAT knew that there had been an unlawful act in the process of making the sale and purchase deed and as a result of the sale and purchase made without good faith, the sale and purchase deed is considered never to have existed. The advice that can be given is that in carrying out its obligations, PPAT should always apply the principle of prudence in pouring information of the parties into a deed, especially in fulfilling the principle of light and cash in sale and purchase."

"Dalam perjanjian tukar-menukar tanah dan bangunan, Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah (PPAT) yang bersangkutan wajib membuat akta sesuai dengan perbuatan hukum yang disepakati para pihak. PPAT juga wajib membaca, menjelaskan, dan memastikan akta PPAT yang dibuat telah sesuai isinya dengan apa yang dikehendaki para pihak, sebelum akta tersebut disampaikan ke kantor pertanahan guna pendaftaran peralihan hak atas tanah. Hal tersebut bertujuan agar akta yang dibuat PPAT terhindar dari unsur penyalahgunaan keadaan dari salah satu pihak, yang menyebabkan cacat kehendak tersebut merugikan pihak lawan. Adapun permasalahan yang dibahas dalam penelitian ini yaitu mengenai peran dan upaya pencegahan PPAT terhadap penyalahgunaan keadaan dalam pembuatan akta terkait tukar-menukar tanah dan bangunan berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 3145 K/Pdt/2020; dan mengenai akibat hukum atas akta jual beli yang dibuat atas dasar penyalahgunaan keadaan dalam perjanjian tukar-menukar tanah dan bangunan berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 3145 K/Pdt/2020. Metode penelitian yang digunakan untuk menjawab rumusan masalah diatas adalah yuridis normatif dengan tipologi penelitian bersifat eksplanatoris. Hasil analisis dari penelitian ini adalah PPAT yang bersangkutan membuat akta jual beli dikarenakan atas dasar penyalahgunaan keadaan salah satu pihak dalam perjanjian tukar-menukar tanah dan bangunan. PPAT seharusnya dapat melakukan upaya pencegahan terjadinya penyalahgunaan keadaan dengan membaca dan menjelaskan isi akta kepada para pihak terlebih dahulu sebelum akta tersebut ditandatangani. Akta yang seharusnya PPAT tersebut buat adalah akta tukar-menukar, mengingat akta PPAT yang dibuat harus sesuai dengan perbuatan hukum yang disepakati para pihak dan diatur dalam Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997. Adapun akibat hukum terhadap akta jual beli yang dibuat PPAT akibat penyalahgunaan keadaan salah satu pihak tetap mengikat dan sah sehingga dapat didaftarkan guna pendaftaran peralihan hak atas tanah. Namun jika pihak lawan mengajukan pembatalan terhadap perbuatan hukum dalam akta tersebut, maka akta jual beli tersebut dapat dibatalkan dengan dasar adanya bukti seperti putusan pengadilan atau akta PPAT mengenai perbuatan hukum yang baru.

---

In the land and building exchange agreement, the concerned Land Deed Maker (PPAT) is obliged to make a deed in accordance with the legal actions agreed by the parties. The PPAT is also obliged to read, explain, and ensure that the PPAT deed made is in accordance with what the parties want, before the deed is submitted to the land office for registration of the transfer of land rights. This is intended so that the deed made by PPAT is protected from the element of undue influences from one party, which causes the defect of the will to be detrimental to the opposing party. The problems discussed in this study are regarding the PPAT's role and prevention efforts against Undue Influence in making deed related to the exchange of land and buildings based on Decision Number 3145 K/Pdt/2020; and regarding the legal consequences of the deed of sale and purchase made on the basis of Undue Influence in the land and building exchange agreement based on Decision Number 3145 K/Pdt/2020. The research method used to answer the problem formulation above is normative juridical with an explanatory research typology. The results of the analysis of this study are the PPAT concerned made a deed of sale and purchase due to the undue influences of one of the parties in the land and building swap agreement. The PPAT should be able to make efforts to Undue Influence by reading and explaining the contents of the deed to the parties before the deed is signed. The deed that PPAT should have made is a deed of exchange, considering that the PPAT deed made must be in accordance with legal actions agreed upon by the parties and regulated in Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997. The legal consequences of the sale and purchase deed made by PPAT due to Undue Influence because one party remains binding and legal so that it can be registered for registration of the transfer of land rights. However, if the opposing party submits the cancellation of the legal action in the deed, the sale and purchase deed can be canceled on the basis of evidence such as a court decision or PPAT deed regarding a new legal act."

"ABSTRAKNama : SUKIMTO FAHRUDDINNPM : 1506807924Program Studi : Magister KenotariatanJudul : KEABSAHAN JUAL BELI TANAH DAN BANGUNAN TANPA LEVERING STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 1172 K/Pdt/2015 Sengketa seharusnya tidak terjadi pada transaksi jual beli tanah dan bangunan jika para pihak melakukannya sesuai dengan koridor perundang-undangan yang berlaku, yaitu setelah pihak pembeli membayar harganya, penjual dalam suatu waktu tertentu langsung menyerahkan obyek jual belinya kepada pembeli dalam keadaan kosong. Hal ini dikarenakan jual beli dianggap telah terjadi antara kedua belah pihak apabila asas terang dan tunai terpenuhi sebagaimana diatur dalam ketentuan Undang Undang Pokok Agraria yang menganut sistem hukum adat. Lalu bagaimanakah keabsahan jual beli tanah dan bangunan tanpa levering menurut putusan mahkamah agung nomor 1172/K/Pdt/2015 dan Bagaimanakah akibat hukum yang ditimbulkan dari transaksi jual beli tanah dan bangunan tanpa levering menurut Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1172/K/Pdt/2015 apabila obyek jual beli dikuasai oleh pihak ketiga? Tesis ini merupakan hasil penelitian kualitatif dengan metode penelitian normatif yaitu penelitian hukum yang memiliki kegiatan mengumpulkan bahan pustaka ataudata sekunder belaka atau suatu prosedur penelitian ilmiah untuk menemukan kebenaran berdasarkan logika ilmu hukum dari sisi normatifnya. Dengan dilakukannya penandatanganan jual beli di hadapan PPAT, maka Jual Beli Tanah dan Bangunan tanpa levering tersebut adalah sah dan mengikat para pihak yang melakukan jual beli dan pihak ketiga yang menguasai obyek jual beli. Hal ini dikarenakan asas jual beli dalam UUPA adalah terang, tunai, dan riil. Sedangkan akibat hukumnya adalah transaksi tersebut tetap sah dan berlaku mengikat para pihak dan pihak ketiga, namun diperlukan upaya hukum lanjutan untuk mengambil kembali obyek jual beli dari tangan pihak ketiga.

---

ABSTRACTNama SUKIMTO FAHRUDDINNPM 1506807924Program Studi Magister KenotariatanJudul LEGALITY OF LAND AND BUILDING TRANSACTION WITHOUT LEVERING STUDY OF SUPREME COURT OF REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA rsquo S DECISION NUMBER 1172 K Pdt 2015 Disputes should not occur in the transactions of land and building if the parties do so in accordance with the applicable legislation corridor, In example, after the buyer pays the price, the seller in a certain time directly submit the object of the transactions to the buyer. This is because the sale and purchase is considered to have occurred between both parties if the principle of light and cash is fulfilled as stipulated in the provisions of Basic Agrarian Law which adheres to customary law system. What is the validity of the sale and purchase of land and buildings without levering according to the decision of Supreme Court of Republic of Indonesia number 1172 K Pdt 2015 and how the law resulted from the sale and purchase transactions of land and buildings without levering according to the decision of Supreme Court Number 1172 K Pdt 2015 if the object of sale and purchase controlled by a third party This thesis is the result of qualitative research with normative research method that is law research which have activity of collecting bibliography or mere secondary data or a procedure of scientific research to find truth based on legal logic from normative side. With the signing of the sale and purchase transactions in the presence of PPAT, the Sale and Purchase of Land and Building without levering is legitimate and binding the parties who do the buying and selling and the third party who controls the object of sale and purchase. This is because the principle of sale and purchase in the Basic Agrarian Law is bright, cash, and real. While the legal consequences are those transactions remain valid and apply binding to the parties and third parties, but required further legal efforts to retrieve the objects of sale and purchase from the hands of third parties. "

"Tujuan penerbitan seritpikat hak milik oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional seharusnya memberikan pengakuan serta kepastian hukum kepada masyarakat atas kepemilikan tanah. Indonesia menganut sistem publikasi negatif, yang berarti terhadap kedudukan sertipikat dan/atau hak atas tanah masih dapat disangkalkan, Pada praktiknya masih ditemukan permasalahan tanah terkait penerbitan sertipikat, meskipun telah melalui prosedur dan/atau regulasi yang ditetapkan, terhadap proses penerbitan suatu sertipikat tanah juga dapat didasarkan atas akta autentik Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah, sebagai penegasan suatu perbuatan hukum terkait peralihan hak atas tanah. Adapun permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai bagaimana terjadinya tumpang tindih sertipikat hak milik yang diterbitkan oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional, yang dibuat berdasarkan akta jual beli Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah; dan Bagaimana kepastian hukum atas diterbitkan sertipikat hak milik yang tumpang tindih oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian Preskriptif. Hasil analisis adalah belum maksimalnya proses penetapan batas bidang-bidang tanah yang berbatasan oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional, yang disebabkan karena salah satu pemegang hak atas tanah yang berbatasan tidak menguasai tanah tersebut secara fisik, yang dikemudian hari menyebabkan terjadinya tumpang tindih atas sebagian luas tanah yang dimiliki, dengan tanah yang dimiliki pihak lain, yang juga berlandasakan sertipikat hak milik yang diterbitkan oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional, sehingga untuk mendapatkan kepastian hukum terhadap sertipikat hak milik yang bertumpang tindih tersebut, ditempuh melalui upaya litigasi, yang kemudian terhadap tanah yang tidak diakui secara hukum, diajukan pembatalan produk hukum melalui Kepala Kantor Pertanahan. Adapun saran yang dapat diberikan yaitu memperkuat peran Badan Pertanahan Nasional dalam penerbitan sertipikat serta dibentuknya bidang atau fungsi khusus dari Badan Pertanahan Nasional yang melakukan pengecekan atau validasi atas proses penerbitan sertipikat hak milik, guna memastikan tanah terbebas dari sengketa.

---

The purpose of issuing a series of property rights by the National Land Agency should be to provide recognition and legal certainty to the community for land ownership. Indonesia adheres to a negative publication system, which means that the position of certificates and/or land rights can still be denied, In practice there are still land problems related to the issuance of certificates, even though they have gone through established procedures and/or regulations, to the process of issuing a certificate land may also be based on the authentic deed of the Land Deed-Making Officer, as an affirmation of a legal action related to the transfer of land rights. The issues raised in this study are about how there is an overlap of property rights certificates issued by the National Land Agency, which is made based on the deed of sale and purchase of the Land Deed Making Officer; and How is the legal certainty of the issuance of overlapping certificates of property rights by the National Land Agency. To answer these problems, normative juridical research methods with a prescriptive type of research are used. The result of the analysis is that the process of determining the boundaries of adjacent land plots by the National Land Agency has not been maximized, which is caused by one of the rights holders of the adjacent land not physically controlling the land, which in the future causes an overlap of part of the land area owned, with land owned by other parties, which is also based on the certificate of property rights issued by the National Land Agency, so as to obtain legal certainty against the overlapping certificate of property rights, pursued through litigation efforts, which then against land that is not legally recognized, it is proposed that the cancellation of legal products through the Head of the Land Office. The advice that can be given is to strengthen the role of the National Land Agency in issuing certificates and the establishment of a special field or function of the National Land Agency that checks or validates the process of issuing title certificates, in order to ensure that the land is free from disputes.

"

"[Pengertian hibah yang diatur dalam Pasal 1666 KUH Perdata adalahperjanjian yang dilakukan oleh penghibah ketika masih hidup untukmemberikan suatu barang dengan cuma-cuma kepada penerima hibah dantidak dapat ditarik kembali. Kata-kata “tidak dapat ditarik kembali” iniberarti pencabutan hibah baru dapat dilakukan jika penerima hibahmemberi persetujuan kepada pemberi hibah. Syarat dan tata cara untukmelakukan hibah adalah harus dengan akta notaris untuk objek hibahberupa benda bergerak seperti disebutkan dalam Pasal 1682 KUHPerdata, dan dengan akta PPAT untuk tanah dan bangunan seperti yangdisebutkan dalam Pasal 37 ayat (1) PP No. 24/1997. Yang akandibicarakan dalam tesis ini adalah bagaimana syarat-syarat untukpembuatan akta hibah terutama terhadap barang tetap (tanah) serta tatacara pencabutan terhadap akta hibah otentik, dan bagaimana akibathukum terhadap pembatalan akta hibah yang dilakukan dengan suratpernyataan pencabutan yang dibuat di bawah tangan dan diwaarmerkingoleh Notaris. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metodekualitatif yang berbentuk yuridis normatif untuk memberikanpemahaman mengenai analisis terhadap implikasi pembatalan akta hibahsecara sepihak dengan surat pernyataan di bawah tangan yang diwaarmerking danperalihan hak atas tanah yang dibuat tanpa akta PPAT. Hibah atas barang tetap(tanah) yang dibuat tanpa akta PPAT tidak menyebabkan perbuatanhukum hibahnya menjadi batal atau akta hibahnya menjadi tidak sah,karena hal ini hanya menyangkut akta hibahnya saja, sedangkan untukpendaftaran peralihan haknya dapat dibuat kembali di hadapan PPATyang nantinya digunakan sebagai dasar untuk peralihan hak ke KantorPertanahan. Akta hibah yang telah memenuhi persyaratan pembuatanakta otentik sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 1868 KUH Perdata makapembatalannya tidak dapat dilakukan secara sepihak dengan suratpernyataan di bawah dan diwaarmerking, melainkan harus diajukan kepengadilan umum. Dengan demikian, surat pernyataan pembatalan aktahibah yang dibuat di bawah tangan tersebut adalah tidak sah dan bataldemi hukum.;The definition of grant provided for in Article 1666 of the Civil Code is anagreement made by grantor while still alive to give an item for free to granteesand irrevocable. The words "irrevocable" means repeal the new grant can be doneif the grantee to give consent to the grantor. Requirements and procedures to carryout the grant is to be the object of a notarial deed for a grant in the form ofmoving objects as mentioned in Article 1682 Civil Code, and the PPAT deed forthe land and buildings as mentioned in Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/1997.Which will be discussed in this thesis is how the conditions for the grant deed,especially against goods fixed (ground) as well as the procedure for revocation ofthe authentic grant deed, and how the legal consequences of the cancellation ofthe grant deed performed by a letter of revocation declaration made under thehand and waarmerkened by Notary. The method used in this study is a qualitativemethod in the form of normative to provide an understanding of the analysis ofthe implications of the cancellation of the deed of grant unilaterally by waiverunder waarmerken hands and transfer of rights on land made without PPAT deed.Grants of goods fixed (ground) are made without PPAT deed does not lead tolegal action grants will be canceled or deed grants become invalid, because itconcerns only its grant deed alone, while for the registration of transfer of rightscan be made back before PPAT that will be used as the basis for the transfer ofrights to the Land Office. Grant deed that has met the requirements of makingauthentic document as referred to in Article 1868 of the Civil Code, thecancellation can not be done unilaterally by the letter of the statement below andunder waarmerken, but should be brought to public trial. Thus, a statement ofcancellation of the deed grants made under the hand is invalid and void.;The definition of grant provided for in Article 1666 of the Civil Code is anagreement made by grantor while still alive to give an item for free to granteesand irrevocable. The words "irrevocable" means repeal the new grant can be doneif the grantee to give consent to the grantor. Requirements and procedures to carryout the grant is to be the object of a notarial deed for a grant in the form ofmoving objects as mentioned in Article 1682 Civil Code, and the PPAT deed forthe land and buildings as mentioned in Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/1997.Which will be discussed in this thesis is how the conditions for the grant deed,especially against goods fixed (ground) as well as the procedure for revocation ofthe authentic grant deed, and how the legal consequences of the cancellation ofthe grant deed performed by a letter of revocation declaration made under thehand and waarmerkened by Notary. The method used in this study is a qualitativemethod in the form of normative to provide an understanding of the analysis ofthe implications of the cancellation of the deed of grant unilaterally by waiverunder waarmerken hands and transfer of rights on land made without PPAT deed.Grants of goods fixed (ground) are made without PPAT deed does not lead tolegal action grants will be canceled or deed grants become invalid, because itconcerns only its grant deed alone, while for the registration of transfer of rightscan be made back before PPAT that will be used as the basis for the transfer ofrights to the Land Office. Grant deed that has met the requirements of makingauthentic document as referred to in Article 1868 of the Civil Code, thecancellation can not be done unilaterally by the letter of the statement below andunder waarmerken, but should be brought to public trial. Thus, a statement ofcancellation of the deed grants made under the hand is invalid and void.;The definition of grant provided for in Article 1666 of the Civil Code is anagreement made by grantor while still alive to give an item for free to granteesand irrevocable. The words "irrevocable" means repeal the new grant can be doneif the grantee to give consent to the grantor. Requirements and procedures to carryout the grant is to be the object of a notarial deed for a grant in the form ofmoving objects as mentioned in Article 1682 Civil Code, and the PPAT deed forthe land and buildings as mentioned in Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/1997.Which will be discussed in this thesis is how the conditions for the grant deed,especially against goods fixed (ground) as well as the procedure for revocation ofthe authentic grant deed, and how the legal consequences of the cancellation ofthe grant deed performed by a letter of revocation declaration made under thehand and waarmerkened by Notary. The method used in this study is a qualitativemethod in the form of normative to provide an understanding of the analysis ofthe implications of the cancellation of the deed of grant unilaterally by waiverunder waarmerken hands and transfer of rights on land made without PPAT deed.Grants of goods fixed (ground) are made without PPAT deed does not lead tolegal action grants will be canceled or deed grants become invalid, because itconcerns only its grant deed alone, while for the registration of transfer of rightscan be made back before PPAT that will be used as the basis for the transfer ofrights to the Land Office. Grant deed that has met the requirements of makingauthentic document as referred to in Article 1868 of the Civil Code, thecancellation can not be done unilaterally by the letter of the statement below andunder waarmerken, but should be brought to public trial. Thus, a statement ofcancellation of the deed grants made under the hand is invalid and void., The definition of grant provided for in Article 1666 of the Civil Code is anagreement made by grantor while still alive to give an item for free to granteesand irrevocable. The words "irrevocable" means repeal the new grant can be doneif the grantee to give consent to the grantor. Requirements and procedures to carryout the grant is to be the object of a notarial deed for a grant in the form ofmoving objects as mentioned in Article 1682 Civil Code, and the PPAT deed forthe land and buildings as mentioned in Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/1997.Which will be discussed in this thesis is how the conditions for the grant deed,especially against goods fixed (ground) as well as the procedure for revocation ofthe authentic grant deed, and how the legal consequences of the cancellation ofthe grant deed performed by a letter of revocation declaration made under thehand and waarmerkened by Notary. The method used in this study is a qualitativemethod in the form of normative to provide an understanding of the analysis ofthe implications of the cancellation of the deed of grant unilaterally by waiverunder waarmerken hands and transfer of rights on land made without PPAT deed.Grants of goods fixed (ground) are made without PPAT deed does not lead tolegal action grants will be canceled or deed grants become invalid, because itconcerns only its grant deed alone, while for the registration of transfer of rightscan be made back before PPAT that will be used as the basis for the transfer ofrights to the Land Office. Grant deed that has met the requirements of makingauthentic document as referred to in Article 1868 of the Civil Code, thecancellation can not be done unilaterally by the letter of the statement below andunder waarmerken, but should be brought to public trial. Thus, a statement ofcancellation of the deed grants made under the hand is invalid and void.]"

"Akta yang dibuat oleh PPAT kerap kali menyebabkan terjadinya suatu sengketaatau konflik dalam pertanahan, sehingga tidak sedikit PPAT yang terjerat perkara diPengadilan yang salah satunya adalah karena pembuatan akta yang tidak sesuai denganprosedur. Pokok permasalahan yang akan dibahas dalam penelitian ini ialah bagaimanabentuk pelanggaran berat pembuatan akta jual beli oleh PPAT dalam kasus di PutusanPengadilan No. 1146 K / PDT / 2020 serta bagaimana pertanggungjawaban PPAT ataspelanggaran berat yang telah dilakukan tersebut. Adapun penelitian ini menggunakanmetode yuridis normatif dan bentuk penelitiannya adalah Eksplanatoris. Hasil daripenelitian ini menyimpulkan pelanggaran berat yang dilakukan ialah pembantuan dalampermufakatan jahat yang mengakibatkan sengketa pertanahan dan membuatkan akta yangtelah terbukti PPAT mengetahui para pihak yang berwenang melakukan perbuatan hukumatau kuasanya tidak hadir dihadap nya sehingga melanggar ketentuan 10 Ayat 3 Huruf aPeraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 2016. Akta Jual Beli yang dinyatakan batal demihukum menjadikan peristiwa hukum akibat lahirnya akta jual beli tersebut dianggap tidakpernah ada turut menjadi tidak sah dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikatantara para pihak. Maka berdasarkan ketentuan pasal 62 PP No. 24 Tahun 1997 jo. pasal55 Peraturan KaBPN No. 1 Tahun 2006, PPAT VNR dapat dikenakan penjatuhan sanksiadministratif berupa pemberhentian dengan tidak hormat dan ganti rugi. Hasil tesis inijuga menyarankan bahwa sebaiknya PPAT selaku pejabat yang memberikan pelayananharus memeriksa kewenangan penghadap sehingga dapat menghasilkan akta berkekuatanpembuktian sempurna.

---

Deed that had been made by land deed officical often cause conflict or dispute

over land, hence there are many land deed official that trap in court because of it which sometimes happens because not following the procedure when making deeds. The subject matter that will be discussed are how the deed against the law by land deed official in the case of the court verdict No. 1146 K / PDT / 2020 in the framework of the creation of the buy and sell deed and how the legal consequences of cancellation of the buy and sell deed are acts against the law by land deed official. As for this research using normative juridical methods and its research form is an explanatory. The form of serious conducted by VNR is aiding as a malicious agreement that resulted in a land dispute and create a deed where he knows the

authorities whom doing legal acts or their proxies are not present before him which is violate

the provisions of verse 10 section a PP 24year 2016 The sale and purchase deed, which is

null and void, makes the legal event due to the birth of the deed is deemed to have never.

According to chapter 62 PP No. 24 year 1997 jo. Chapter 55 Peraturan KaBPN No. 1 year

2006, PPAT VNR can be punished by dismissal with disrespect and compensation. This

thesis also advice that as PPAT who give public service must research about the authority

of the party that make the deed, so the deed can have the perfect evidentiary"

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai kedudukan pemilik tanah yang tidak lagi menguasai tanahnya secara fisik dan juga terkait perlindungan hukum bagi pembeli yang tidak melakukan pengecekan secara fisik atas objek yang dibelinya dalam kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1131 K/Pdt/2020. Adapun penelitian ini menggunakan bentuk penelitian dengan pendekatan doktinal terhadap hukum. Dalam hal ini, pemegang hak milik atas tanah yang secara sengaja tidak menguasai secara fisik, tidak mengusahakan, tidak mempergunakan, tidak memanfaatkan, dan/atau tidak memelihara tanah yang ia miliki dapat menyebabkan tanah miliknya tersebut dapat dikategorikan sebagai tanah terlantar dan mengakibatkan pemutusan hubungan hukum antara subjek pemilik hak atas tanah dengan objek tanah sehingga pihak pemilik di sini tidak lagi memiliki hak milik atas tanah yang berkaitan. Dengan demikian, maka pihak pemilik di dalam kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1131 K/Pdt/2020 tidaklah berhak untuk melakukan jual beli atas tanah tersebut karena ia bukanlah pemilik yang sah atas tanah tersebut dan mengakibatkan jual beli tersebut menjadi batal demi hukum. Berkaitan dengan batal demi hukumnya jual beli tersebut, pihak pembeli yang berhak mendapatkan perlindungan hukum atas kerugian yang diderita akibat batalnya jual beli tersebut pembeli yang beritikad baik. Adapun pihak JJ selaku pembeli dalam kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1131 K/Pdt/2020 tidak melakukan pengecekan fisik secara aktif dan cermat mengenai ada atau tidaknya pihak yang menguasai secara fisik obyek tanah yang akan dibelinya dan juga tidak menguasai objek tanah tersebut secara fisik. Dengan demikian, maka pihak JJ di sini tidak dapat dikategorikan sebagai Pembeli Beritikad Baik dan tidaklah berhak untuk mendapatkan perlindungan hukum atas batal demi hukumnya perjanjian jual beli.

---

This research discuss the position of land owners who no longer physically control their land and also regarding legal protection for buyers who do not physically inspect the objects they buy in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 1131 K/Pdt/2020. This research uses a form of research with a doctinal approach to law. In this case, the holder of property rights to land who deliberately does not physically control, does not cultivate, does not use, does not exploit, and/or does not maintain the land he owns can cause his land to be categorized as abandoned land and result in the termination of the legal relationship between the subject who owns the land rights and the land object so that the owner here no longer has ownership rights to the land in question. Thus, the owner in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 1131 K/Pdt/2020 does not have the right to sell the land because she is not the legal owner of the land and this results in the sale and purchase being null and void. In connection with the nullity of the sale and purchase, the buyer is entitled to legal protection for losses suffered as a result of the cancellation of the sale and purchase, is the buyer who acted with good faith. Meanwhile, JJ as the buyer in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 1131 K/Pdt/2020 did not carry out an active and careful physical check regarding whether or not there was a party who physically controlled the land object he was going to buy and also did not physically control the land object. Thus, JJ here cannot be categorized as a Buyer in Good Faith and is not entitled to legal protection against the nullity of the sale and purchase agreement."

"Perbuatan hukum dengan tujuan peralihan hak atas tanah salah satunya dapat dilakukan melalui jual beli yang kemudian dibuatkan akta autentik oleh Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah (PPAT) yang berwenang untuk dilakukan peralihan kepada pemegang hak baru sebagaimana ketentuan dalam Peraturan Pemerintah No. 24 tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah. Namun dalam kenyataannya, terdapat Akta Jual Beli (AJB) dengan tujuan peralihan hak atas tanah yang dibuat oleh pihak yang tidak berwenang sebagaimana ditemukan dalam kasus pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1869K/PDT/2022. Permasalahan utama yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah berkaitan dengan perbuatan melawan hukum dalam proses pembuatan AJB dengan tujuan peralihan hak atas tanah yang kemudian dilakukan peralihan kepada pemegang hak baru. Untuk dapat memberikan penjelasan ekstensif terkait permasalahan utama tersebut maka dilakukan analisis tentang akibat hukum terhadap AJB peralihan hak atas tanah yang dibuat secara melawan hukum. Selain itu juga mengenai tanggung jawab PPAT yang melakukan pelanggaran terhadap prosedur dalam pembuatan AJB peralihan hak atas tanah. Data sekunder yang didapatkan melalui studi dokumen pada penelitian doktrinal ini adalah berupa bahan-bahan hukum yang diperkuat dengan wawancara kepada narasumber dan kemudian dilakukan analisis secara kualitatif. Dari hasil penelitian dapat dijelaskan bahwa meskipun terdapat perbedaan akibat hukum dari AJB yang diteliti seharusnya kedua AJB tersebut tidak dapat dilakukan peralihan kepada pemegang hak baru karena tidak memenuhi persyaratan formil pembuatan AJB yakni dilakukan di hadapan PPAT yang berwenang dan PPAT yang melakukan pelanggaran terhadap prosedur pembuatan AJB hak atas tanah diberikan sanksi baik secara administratif dengan pemberhentian secara tidak hormat, perdata dengan gugatan ganti rugi dan bahkan berpotensi diberikan sanksi pidana apabila memenuhi unsur-unsur dalam Pasal 264 dan 266 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.

---

One of the legal actions to transfer land rights can be carried out through sale and purchase, which is then made an authentic deed by a Land Deed Official (PPAT) authorized to transfer to the new right holder by the Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 regarding Land Registration. However, in reality, there are Land Title Deeds made by unauthorized parties as found in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 1869K/PDT/2022. The main problem discussed in this thesis is related to the tort of law in the process of making AJB in order to transfer land rights to new rights holders. To be able to provide an extensive explanation related to the main problem, an analysis is carried out on the legal consequencesof the Land Title Deed for the transfer of land rights made against the law In addition, it is also about the responsibility of the PPAT who violates the procedure in making AJB for the transfer of land rights. Secondary data obtained through document studies in this doctrinal research is in the form of legal materials reinforced by interviews with sources and then analyzed qualitatively. From the results of the research, it can be explained that although there are differences in the legal consequences of the AJBs studied, the two AJBs should not be transferred to the new right holder because they do not fulfill the formal requirements for making AJBs, which are carried out in the presence of an authorized PPAT and PPATs who violate the procedures for making AJBs of land rights are given sanctions both administratively with dishonorable dismissal, civil with compensation claims and even potentially criminal sanctions if they meet the elements in Articles 264 and 266 of the Criminal Code.

 

"

"[Penulisan skripsi ini menggunakan metode penelitian kepustakaan dengan data sekunder sebagai sumber datanya. Skripsi ini bertujuan untuk meneliti mengenai jual beli tanah dan bangunan yang diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan serta kedudukan dan kekuatan mengikat Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Lunas (PPJB Lunas) dan Kuasa Jual dalam hal pengalihan hak milik atas tanah (beserta bangunan apabila diperjanjikan). Dalam skripsi ini, dianalisis satu kasus dengan empat putusan dari Pengadilan Tingkat Pertama sampai dengan Tingkat Peninjauan Kembali. Dari analisis tersebut, dapat diketahui bahwa ada dua pendapat hakim yang saling bertentangan. Pendapat pertama adalah dengan PPJB Lunas dan Kuasa Jual maka telah terjadinya peralihan hak milik atas tanah dan bangunan sedangkan pendapat kedua adalah dengan PPJB Lunas dan Kuasa Jual belum terjadi peralihan hak milik atas tanah dan bangunan. Sebagai hasil penelitian dapat disimpulkan bahwa kedudukan dan kekuatan mengikat PPPJB Lunas dan Kuasa Jual telah mengalihkan hak milik atas tanah dan bangunan apabila dalam kenyataannya sudah terjadi perbuatan hukum dimana pembeli telah melakukan pembayaran dan telah menerima penyerahan serta menguasai tanah dan bangunan tersebut, sedangkan penjual telah menyerahkan Kuasa Jual dan tanah serta bangunan itu sendiri kepada pembeli dan penjual telah menerima pembayaran sehingga perbuatan tersebut memenuhi unsur terang, tunai dan riil sebagaimana dasar hukum jual beli tanah yang berlaku pada saat ini, serta memenuhi syarat materiil jual beli.

---

This thesis was written using literary research method with secondary data as its source of data. This thesis aims to examine the mechanisms sale and purchase of land and building which is regulated in accordance with the laws and regulations and the legal standing and binding of Land and Building Conditional Sale Purchase Agreement in Full Settlement (CSPA in Full Settlement) and Power of Attorney to Sell, in connection with the transfer of right of ownership over the land (and building if agreed). This thesis will primarily analyze one legal case which went to produce four court decisions, leveling from the Court of First Instance until the Supreme Court. From this analysis, it is discovered that there are two judge’s opinion, which contradicts one to another. The first opinion is that, the CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have transferred the right of ownership over land and building, while the second opinion is that the CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have not transferred the right of ownership over land and building yet. As a result of this study, it can be concluded that the legal standing and binding of CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have transferred the right of ownership over land and building when the facts of the case show that it had happened a juridical action in which the buyer has made payment and has conducted the acceptance, and possessed the land and buildings, while the seller has granted the Power of Attorney to Sell and delivered the land and building to the buyer and received the payment for it. Such action would therefore qualified for a sale and purchase that is “terang”, “tunai” and “riil”, which is the basic of legality of the sale and purchase of the land under the prevailing laws, as well as the fulfilling the material requirement of sales and purchase.

, This thesis was written using literary research method with secondary data as its source of data. This thesis aims to examine the mechanisms sale and purchase of land and building which is regulated in accordance with the laws and regulations and the legal standing and binding of Land and Building Conditional Sale Purchase Agreement in Full Settlement (CSPA in Full Settlement) and Power of Attorney to Sell, in connection with the transfer of right of ownership over the land (and building if agreed). This thesis will primarily analyze one legal case which went to produce four court decisions, leveling from the Court of First Instance until the Supreme Court. From this analysis, it is discovered that there are two judge’s opinion, which contradicts one to another. The first opinion is that, the CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have transferred the right of ownership over land and building, while the second opinion is that the CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have not transferred the right of ownership over land and building yet. As a result of this study, it can be concluded that the legal standing and binding of CSPA in Full Settlement and Power of Attorney to Sell have transferred the right of ownership over land and building when the facts of the case show that it had happened a juridical action in which the buyer has made payment and has conducted the acceptance, and possessed the land and buildings, while the seller has granted the Power of Attorney to Sell and delivered the land and building to the buyer and received the payment for it. Such action would therefore qualified for a sale and purchase that is “terang”, “tunai” and “riil”, which is the basic of legality of the sale and purchase of the land under the prevailing laws, as well as the fulfilling the material requirement of sales and purchase.

]"