Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Pembatalan suatu surat kuasa menjual oleh pengadilan karena terdapat unsur penipuan, seharusnya mengakibatkan perbuatan pemindahan hak atas tanah melalui jual beli adalah batal demi hukum, tetapi Majelis Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Sleman dalam putusannya nomor 83/Pdt.G/2013/PN.Slmn memutus bahwa perbuatan jual beli tersebut adalah sah demi hukum. Berdasarkan hal tersebut penelitian ini membahas mengenai bagaimana kekuatan mengikat akta jual beli atas surat kuasa menjual yang dinyatakan tidak sah dan batal demi hukum dan apakah alasan-alasan hukum yang digunakan dalam pertimbangan hukum pada putusan Pengadilan Negeri Sleman Nomor 83/Pdt.G/2013/PN.Slmn sebagai alasan pengesahan akta jual beli telah sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan yang berlaku. Bentuk penelitian dalam penulisan tesis ini adalah yuridis-normatif, karena penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis norma hukum tertulis/asas hukum dalam pelaksanaannya pada putusan pengadilan dan penerapannya dalam kasus atau peristiwa hukum terkait sinkronisasi. Dalam jual beli hak atas tanah, orang yang berhak menjual adalah pemilik tanah itu. Pemilik dapat bertindak sendiri atau mewakilkan dirinya dengan memberi kuasa kepada orang lain. Dengan adanya pemberian kuasa tersebut, maka penerima kuasa memiliki kewenangan untuk bertindak sebagai penjual. Keabsahan hukum jual beli tanah haruslah ditinjau dari Hukum Tanah Nasional dan putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 123/K/Sip/1970. Menurut putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 123/K/Sip/1970, sahnya jual beli hak atas tanah ditentukan oleh syarat materil dari jual beli itu, yang salah satunya adalah penjual berhak dan berwenang menjual hak atas tanah yang bersangkutan. Apabila penjual tidak berhak dan berwenang, maka jual beli tersebut adalah batal demi hukum. Jika suatu akta kuasa menjual dibatalkan oleh pengadilan, maka penerima kuasa tidak berwenang untuk bertindak sebagai penjual, sehingga salah satu syarat materiil sahnya jual beli tidak terpenuhi yaitu penjual tidak berwenang untuk menjual. Hal ini menyebabkan jual beli hak atas tanah adalah batal demi hukum.

---

A power of attorney to sell which is stated null and void by law because there is one of the elements of fraud, should cause the transfer of land rights through sale and purchase is also null and void, however Sleman District Court stated that its sale and purchase is valid. Based on that, this study discusses about the validity of the sale and purchase of land rights that its power of attorney was stated null and void, and whether the legal reasons that was used by the court had been conformable with the law. This thesis uses normative juridical research methods, because the purpose of this thesis is to analyze the regulations/the principal of law in its implementation on the decision of court and its application in cases or legal case related to synchronization. In the sale and purchase of land rights, the person who has the right to sell is the owner of the land. The owner might act on his/her behalf or authorize others. With such a power of attorney, the attorney has the authority to act as a seller. The validity of the sale and purchase of land rights shall be reviewed from agrarian law and the jurisprudence of Supreme Court Decision number 123/K/Sip/1970. According to Supreme Court Decision number 123/K/Sip/1970, the validity of the sale and purchase of land rights is determined by the material requirements of the sale and purchase, which includes the seller is entitled and competent to sell the land rights, the buyer is entitled to purchase the land rights, the land rights could be sold by law, moreover the land rights is not in dispute. If the seller is not entitled and competent to sell the land rights, resulting the sale and purchase of the land rights is null and void. In case, the power of attorney is stated null by the court, then the attorney has no authority to act as a seller, so one of the material requirements is not fulfilled that is the seller is not authorized to sell. This causes the transfer of land rights is null and void.

Abstrak :
Perjanjian Utang Piutang adalah perjanjian dimana pihak kreditur memberikan sesuatu kepada debitur, dengan syarat pihak debitur mengembalikan dengan jumlah yang sama. Namun diperlukan jaminan atas utang salah satunya hak atas tanah dengan menggunakan Hak Tanggungan, namun ada kalanya kreditor tidak menginginkan eksekusi dalam hak tanggungan, melainkan menggunakan PPJB dan Kuasa Untuk Menjual, yang mana bila debitor ingkar janji, maka kreditor dapat menjual atau memiliki jaminan tersebut. Dengan permasalahan yang dirumuskan adalah bagaimanakah kekuatan hukum pembuatan akta PPJB dan kuasa untuk menjual yang didasarkan pada perjanjian Utang piutang (analisis putusan Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta Nomor 115/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Skt), status peralihan hak atas tanah dan AJB yang dibuat berdasarkan akta PPJB dan kuasa menjual yang didasarkan pada perjanjian Utang piutang dan upaya apa yang dapat dilakukan oleh notaris untuk melindungi kepentingan kedua belah pihak dalam kasus tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normative, dengan tipologi penelitian deskriptif analitis. pada putusannya hakim menetapkan bahwa PPJB dan Kuasa Untuk Menjual yang dibuat adalah tidak sah, tidak mengikat dan batal demi hukum karena tidak terpenuhinya syarat sahnya perjanjian, yaitu tidak sesuai dengan kesepakatan yang awalnya adalah Utang piutang menjadi jual beli, dan tidak sesuai dengan sebab yang halal karena tujuannya menguasai objek secara melawan hukum. Serta pemindahan hak atas tanah yang dilakukan adalah batal demi hukum, serta upaya yang dilakukan notaris adalah harus menjalankan jabatan dengan tidak berpihak dan menjelaskan akta kepada para pihak.

---

Credits Agreement are agreements where the creditor gives something to the debtor, provided that the debtor shall return the same amount. However, collateral for debt is required , one of them is the rights to land by using Mortgage, but sometimes when creditors do not want execution in mortgages, but use PPJB and Power of Attorney to Sell, which if the debtor breaks the promise, then the creditor can sell or have the guarantee. while the problems formulated,  how is the legal force of making PPJB deeds and the power to sell based on the debt agreement (analysis of the Surakarta District Court`s decision Number 115/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Skt), the status of the transfer of land rights and AJB passed or made on the basis of the PPJB deed and the power of attorney to sell based on the debt agreement and what efforts can be made by the notary to protect the interests of both parties in the case. This study uses normative legal research methods, with descriptive analytical research typology. in its decision the judge stipulates that the PPJB and the power of attorney to sell made are invalid, non-binding and null and void because the legal terms of the agreement are not fulfilled, which are not in accordance with the initial agreement that the debt becomes a sale and is not in accordance with the legal because the goal is to control the object against the law. As well as the transfer of land rights carried out is null and void by law, and the efforts made by the notary are to carry out the position impartially and explain the deed to the parties.

Abstrak :
[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. ]