ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN NOMOR 181/B/2020/PT.TUN.SBY TENTANG SERTIFIKAT GANDA PADA TANAH GARAPAN

JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF DECISION NUMBER 181/B/2020/PT.TUN.SBY CONCERNING MULTIPLE CERTIFICATES IN ARABLE LAND

        Sengketa terhadap tanah garapan dimuat dalam Putusan No. 181/B/2020/PT.TUN. Penggugat dimenangkan karena telah terlebih dahulu memperoleh pengakuan Sertifikat Hak Milik (SHM), di sisi lain Tergugat II Intervensi mendapatkan SHM atas dasar penguasaannya terhadap objek sengketa dengan dasar penguasaan tanah garapan yang diakuinya dilakukan turun temurun. Penelitian dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk mengetahui dasar pertimbangan hakim dan akibat hukum dari putusan yang memenangkan Penggugat terhadap tanah garapan yang didalilkan Tergugat II Intervensi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan kasus. Bahan hukum yang digunakan yaitu bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, kedua bahan hukum tersebut diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan yang akan dianalisis secara deskriptif preskriptif. Hasil penelitian menemukan jika pertimbangan hukum yang digunakan sudah tepat karena tanah garapan seharusnya digunakan 3 tahun berturut-turut berdasarkan Pasal 9 PP No. 224/1961 sedangkan dari fakta yuridis tidak ditemukan Surat Izin Menggarap yang dimiliki oleh orang tua ataupun kakek dari tergugat II intervensi

Kata Kunci: sertifikat ganda, sengketa, tanah garapan

Disputes on arable land are published in Decision No. 181/B/2020/PT.TUN. The Plaintiff was won because it had already received a recognition of the Certificate of Ownership (SHM), on the other hand Defendant II Interventions received SHM on the basis of his control of the dispute object on the basis of the control of the land that he admitted was carried out for generations. The study was conducted with the aim of finding out the basis of the judge's consideration and the legal consequences of the decision that won the plaintiff against the land that was argued by the Defendant II of the Intervention. This study uses normative legal research methods with legislation approaches, conceptual, and cases. Legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials, both legal materials are obtained through a literature study that will be analyzed descriptively prescriptive. The results of the study found that the legal considerations used were appropriate because the arable land should be used 3 years in a row based on Article 9 PP No. 224/1961 While from the juridical facts there was no work permit that was owned by parents or grandfather from Defendant II Intervention

Keywords: double certificate, dispute, arable land