ANALISIS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG RI NOMOR 651 K/PDT.G/2020 TENTANG PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM ATAS PENGUASAAN RUKO TANPA ALAS HAK DI JAYAPURA

ANALYSIS OF THE SUPREME COURT’S OF INDONESIA VERDICT NUMBER 651 K/PDT.G/2020 ABOUT UNLAWFUL ACTS ON SHOP-HOUSE TENURE WITHOUT RIGHTS IN JAYAPURA

UUPA mengatur kewenangan perorangan maupun badan hukum untuk menggunakan tanah yang menjadi haknya. Jenis-jenis hak atas tanah tersebut diatur dalam Pasal 16 UUPA. Penguasaan atas tanah tanpa alas hak yang sah ialah perbuatan melawan hukum dan seseorang yang merasa dirugikan atasnya dapat mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan. Penelitian ini akan menganalisis pertimbangan hakim dan akibat hukum dari Putusan Nomor 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 terhadap penguasaan ruko tanpa alas hak sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum. Penguasaan ruko tersebut pada mulanya berdasarkan pada perbuatan jual beli yang dilakukan oleh Handoyo Tjondrokusumo (Pemohon Kasasi) dan H.M. Arsyad Made (Termohon Kasasi). Adapun faktanya hakim tidak mempertimbangkan atas perjanjian jual beli yang mengikat para pihak dan dalam menyatakan perbuatan penguasaan ruko tanpa alas hak sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum hanya berdasarkan pada pemberian kunci ruko atas itikad baik. Fokus pada penelitian ini adalah pada pertimbangan hakim serta akibat hukum yang timbul dari Putusan MA RI Nomor 651 K/Pdt.G/2020. Tujuan dari penelitian ini ialah untuk mengetahui pertimbangan hakim dan mengetahui akibat hukum dari putusan tersebut.

Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian jenis normatif yang mengkaji pertimbangan hakim dan akibat hukum yang timbul dari Putusan MA RI Nomor 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 terkait perbuatan jual beli serta penguasaan ruko tanpa alas hak sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum. Pendekatan yang digunakan yaitu pendekatan undang-undang, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Adapun bahan hukum yang digunakan yakni bahan hukum primer dan sekunder dimana kesemuanya berkaitan dengan jual beli serta perbuatan melawan hukum terhadap penguasaan ruko tanpa alas hak. Teknik pengumpulan bahan hukum tersebut dilakukan dengan studi kepustakaan dan teknik analisis bahan hukum dilakukan dengan cara preskriptif.

Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh yaitu pertimbangan hakim tidak memasukkan pertimbangan terhadap perjanjian jual beli yang mengikat para pihak dan kualifisir unsur-unsur perbuatan melawan hukum. Pertimbangan hakim yang menyatakan bahwa dasar gugatan ialah pada rencana jual beli dan perbuatan penguasaan ruko tanpa alas hak sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum hanya berdasarkan penyerahan kunci yang merupakan itikad baik ialah kurang tepat. Akibat hukum yang timbul atas Putusan MA RI Nomor 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 ialah Handoyo Tjondrokusumo (Pemohon Kasasi) berwenang untuk mempergunakan tanah yang menjadi haknya serta berdasarkan perjanjian jual beli yang mengikat para pihak maka ia harus mengembalikan uang panjar yang terlanjur dibayarkan, serta hubungan keduanya hapus karena telah batal dengan sendirinya jual beli dikarenakan H.M. Arsyad Made tidak melunasi pembayaran 30%. Adapun akibat hukum atas perbuatan melawan hukum yang dilakukan ialah pembayaran ganti rugi sebesar Rp 528.000.000.00,.

Kata Kunci: Perbuatan Melawan Hukum, Jual Beli, Penguasaan Ruko

The UUPA regulates the authority of individuals and legal entities to use land that is their right. The types of land rights are regulated in Article 16 of UUPA. Land tenure without legal rights is unlawful and a person who feels aggrieved by it can file a lawsuit in court. This study will analyze the judge's considerations and the legal consequences of Verdict No. 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 on the control of shophouses without rights as an unlawfull acts. The control of the shophouse was originally based on a sale and purchase act carried out by Handoyo Tjondrokusumo (the Petitioner for Cassation) and HM Arsyad Made (the Respondent for Cassation). As for the fact that the judge did not consider the sale and purchase agreement binding the parties and in declaring the shop-house tenure without any rights as an unlawful acts was only based on giving the shop key in good faith. The focus of this research is on the judge's considerations and the legal consequences arising from the RI Supreme Court Verdict Number 651 K/Pdt.G/2020. The purpose of this study is to determine the judge's considerations and to know the legal consequences of the decision.

This study uses a normative type of research method that examines the judge's considerations and the legal consequences arising from the RI Supreme Court Verdict Number 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 related to buying and selling acts and the shop-house tenure without rights as an unlawful act. The approaches used are the legal approach, the conceptual approach, and the case approach. The legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials, all of which are related to buying and selling and unlawful acts against the shop-house tenure without rights. The technique of collecting legal materials is carried out by means of a literature study and the technique of analyzing legal materials is carried out in a prescriptive way.

The results of the research obtained are that the judge's consideration does not include consideration of the sale and purchase agreement that binds the parties and the qualifications of the elements of an unlawful act. The judge's consideration which stated that the basis of the lawsuit was on the plan of buying and selling and the shop-house tenure without any rights as an act against the law only based on the surrender of the key which was in good faith was not quite right. The legal consequence arising from the RI Supreme Court Verdict Number 651 K/Pdt.G/2020 that Handoyo Tjondrokusumo (Petitioner for Cassation) is authorized to use the land which is his right and based on the sale and purchase agreement that binds the parties, he must return the down payment that has already been paid, and the relationship between the two was deleted because the sale and purchase had automatically canceled because HM Arsyad Made did not pay 30% of the payment. The legal consequences of unlawful acts committed are the payment of compensation in the amount of Rp. 528.000.000,00.

Keywords: unlawful acts, buying and selling, shop-house tenure