“ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN KASASI MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 1753 K/PDT/2015 MENGENAI PERKARA SENGKETA SERTIPIKAT HAK MILIK ATAS TANAH”

• “JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF COURT OF CASE NUMBER 1753 K/PDT/2015 CONCERNING LAND PROPERTY CERTIFICATE DISPUTES”

Abstrak

Pada kasus sengketa kepemilikan hak atas tanah pada Putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1753

K/PDT/2015 bahwa di muka persidangan Pengadilan Negeri Selong H.Muh. Thohir sebelum diajukan gugatan

ke Pengadilan menginginkan penyelesaian sengketa dihadapan Kepala Desa Aikmel sehingga terbitlah Berita

Acara Penyelesaian sengketa yang dibuat oleh Kepala Desa Aikmel pada tahun 2013. perbuatan Terbanding

I/Tergugat I yang menguasai, mempertahankan dan tidak mau mengembalikan tanah sengketa beserta Sertifikat

Hak Milik nomor 1740/2008 atas nama H.Muh. Thohir dan membuat Surat Pernyataan Jual Beli atas obyek

sengketa tanggal 14 Agustus 2007 antara Pembanding/Penggugat dengan Terbanding I/Tergugat I yang dibuat

oleh Kepada Desa Aikmel dan termasuk segala surat peralihan Hak atas tanah lainnya yang timbul atas obyek

sengketa. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk menganalisis mengenai kebenaran menurut konsep hukum perdata agraria

tergugat telah dikatakan memenuhi unsur perbuatan melawan hukum (onrechtmatige daad) pada pertimbangan

hakim putusan kasasi mahkamah agung nomor 1753 K/PDT/2015 dan bentuk perlindungan hukum yang dapat

dilakukan oleh penggugat atas sengketa hak milik atas tanah tersebut. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum

yuridis normatif membahas doktrin-doktrin atau asas-asas dalam ilmu hukum. Hasil analisis penelitian dan

pembahasan menunjukkan bahwa Gugatan Penggugat kabur (obscuur libel) Baik mengenai Subyek maupun

Obyek gugatan serta kronologis tentang kepemilikan tanah Obyek sengketa yang dikuasai oleh para Tergugat;

Kabur mengenai subyek gugatan; Penggugat telah salah menarik para pihak didalam perkara a quo, Akibat

hukum yang ditimbulkan atas sengketa hak milik atas tanah tersebut pada putusan kasasi mahkamah agung

nomor 1753 K/PDT/2015 tanda tangan Penggugat dalam Surat pernyataan Jual Beli antara Penggugat dan

Tergugat I (T-I) berbeda sehingga tidak cukup kuat untuk menyatakan bahwa jual beli antara Penggugat dengan

Tergugat I atas objek sengketa adalah tidak sah.

Kata Kunci : Hak Milik, Hak Atas Tanah, Pertimbangan Hakim, Putusan Kasasi, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum.

Abstract

In the case in the Supreme Court's Cassation Decision Number 1753 K/PDT/2015 that before the trial of the

Selong H.Muh District Court. Thohir before the lawsuit was submitted to the Court, he wanted a dispute

resolution before the Aikmel Village Head so that the Minutes of Settlement of the dispute made by the Aikmel

Village Head in 2013. The actions of Defendant I / Defendant I who controlled, defended and did not want to

return the disputed land along with the Ownership Certificate number 1740/2008 on behalf of H.Muh. Thohir

and made a Sale and Purchase Statement on the object of the dispute dated August 14, 2007 between the

Appellant/Plaintiff and Defendant I/Defendant I made by To Aikmel Village and including all other letters of

transfer of land rights arising from the object of the dispute. The purpose of this study is to analyze the truth

according to the concept of civil agrarian law that the defendant has said to fulfill the elements of an unlawful act

(onrechtmatige daad) in the judge's consideration of the Supreme Court cassation decision number 1753

K/PDT/2015 and the form of legal protection that can be carried out by the plaintiff over rights disputes.

ownership of the land. This research is a normative juridical law research discussing the doctrines or principles

in the science of law. The results of the research analysis and discussion show that the Plaintiff's claim is obscuur

libel, both regarding the subject and object of the lawsuit and the chronology of land ownership. The object of

the dispute is controlled by the Defendants; Escape about the subject of the lawsuit; The Plaintiff has wrongly

withdrawn the parties in the a quo case. The legal consequences arising from the dispute over the ownership

rights to the land are in the Supreme Court's cassation decision number 1753 K/PDT/2015, the Plaintiff's

signature in the Sale and Purchase Statement between the Plaintiff and Defendant I (TI) different so that it is not

strong enough to state that the sale and purchase between the Plaintiff and Defendant I on the object of the

dispute is invalid.

Keywords: Property Rights, Land Rights, Judges' Considerations, Cassation Decisions, Unlawful Acts.