Analisis Perkara Terhadap Pemegang Sertifikat Hak Milik Nomor 2172 dan Nomor 2277 Dalam Kepemilikan Sertifikat Ganda (Studi Putusan Nomor: 65/PDT.G /2019/ PN. Rbi).

voth, alfa rizky (2026) Analisis Perkara Terhadap Pemegang Sertifikat Hak Milik Nomor 2172 dan Nomor 2277 Dalam Kepemilikan Sertifikat Ganda (Studi Putusan Nomor: 65/PDT.G /2019/ PN. Rbi). Undergraduate thesis, UPN Veteran Jawa Timur.

	Text (Cover) 21071010232.-cover (1).pdf Download (1MB)
	Text (Bab 1) 21071010232.-bab1.pdf Download (360kB)
	Text (Bab 2) 21071010232.-bab2.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 10 July 2029. Download (236kB)
	Text (Bab 3) 21071010232.-bab3.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 10 July 2029. Download (236kB)
	Text (Bab 4) 21071010232.-bab4.pdf Download (149kB)
	Text (Daftar Pustaka) 21071010232.-daftarpustaka.pdf Download (180kB)
	Text (Lampiran) 21071010232.-lampiran (1).pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 10 July 2029. Download (2MB)

Abstract

One type of land dispute that frequently creates legal uncertainty for interested parties is the issue of multiple land titles (double certification) for the same plot of land. When more than one certificate is issued for the same property, the certificate—which essentially serves as strong evidence of land ownership—can give rise to complications. This study aims to examine whether the plaintiff's lawsuit regarding the ownership of Freehold Titles (SHM) No. 2172 and No. 2277 could be considered formally defective due to the failure to include parties who should have been involved in the case. Furthermore, the study examines the forms of legal protection available to the losing party in Court Decision No. 65/Pdt.G/2019/PN Rbi. Employing a normative-juridical method with case, statutory, and analytical approaches, the study utilizes a descriptive-qualitative analysis. The findings indicate that, although civil and criminal procedural law recognize the concept of *error in persona*—whereby the omission of necessary parties renders a lawsuit defective and inadmissible—an analysis of Supreme Court rulings on multiple titles reveals judicial flexibility in addressing such formal deficiencies. For instance, in Supreme Court Decision No. 3061 K/Pdt/2022, the Court affirmed that the failure to include the National Land Agency (BPN) as a party in a civil lawsuit does not automatically render the suit formally defective, provided the court can summon the agency as a witness or an interested party during the evidentiary proceedings. Regarding legal remedies available to protect the losing party: first, the Indonesian Civil Code guarantees the defendant's right to a defense (through procedural objections or counterclaims); second, administrative protection is provided by the National Land Agency (BPN), which holds the authority to clarify issues regarding multiple titles; and third, legal avenues such as appeals, cassation, and judicial review (*Peninjauan Kembali* or PK) are available. Consequently, even if the defendant loses the initial judgment, their fundamental rights remain protected, including the right to seek compensation.

Item Type:

Thesis (Undergraduate)

Contributors: