Daluwarsa dalam Memperoleh Hak Atas Tanah Menurut Hukum Perdata Indonesia (Studi Putusan No. 96/Pdt.G/2012/PN.Mdn)

Abstract

Expiration is the final deadline for obtaining and or legally releasing a right. The final deadline for obtaining and or releasing a right is the last time limit to obtain and or legally release a right. The problem in this study is how the application of expiration in obtaining land rights under the Civil Law in Indonesia, how the land dispute resolution process in Decision No. 96 / Pdt.G / 2012 / PN.Mdn and what is the consideration of the judge in Decision No. 96 / Pdt.G / 2012 / PN.Mdn in determining the abolition of ownership rights to land. The research method is to use library research (Library Research), namely by conducting research on various reading sources, namely books, legal magazines, opinions of scholars, law regulations and also lecture materials. Field research (Field Research), namely by doing spaciousness in this case the author immediately conducted a study at the Medan District Court by taking a related decision namely Decision No. 96 / Pdt.G /2012/PN.Mdn for analysis. The application of expiration in obtaining land rights according to the Civil Law in Indonesia is seen from the provisions of the abolition of land rights according to Law No. 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Regulations, one of which is caused by land being abandoned by the owner, while in the sense of abandonment, the fact is that the land is not utilized and left for a long time so that it is not maintained. Dispute resolution process in Decision No. 96 / Pdt.G / 2012 / PN.Mdn resolved through the Medan District Court with a trial process based on a civil law event because it cannot be resolved through deliberation. Judge's consideration in Decision No. 96 / Pdt.G / 2012 / PN.Mdn in determining the abolition of property rights on land, Considering, that because the Plaintiff's claim cannot prove ownership of the aquo case object at all, it becomes irrelevant to consider other evidence submitted in court by Plaintiff. Considering whereas from the description of the above considerations, the Assembly is of the opinion that the Plaintiff cannot prove the arguments of the claim so that the petitum concerning the origin and ownership of the Plaintiff over the litde object cannot be granted / rejected.