Analisis Hukum Terhadap Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Dalam Sengketa Obyek Lelang Hak Tanggungan (Studi Putusan Nomor : 192/Pdt.G/2016/PN Mdn)

Abstract

Based on the agreement agreed upon by the debtor and the creditor, a fulfillment of rights and obligations that will result in legal consequences if the agreement is not fulfilled. As a result of a breach of pledge by the debtor, the guarantee of his / her dependent is guaranteed to settle the settlement of all losses suffered by the creditor of the mortgage holder as regulated in article 1, article 6 jo Article 20 paragraph (1) of Law Number 4 Year 1996 regarding Right Land along with the objects related to the land. Of course, through the application of auction to the State Wealth Office and Auction Medan. This often leads to a reaction of resistance by the debtor by filing a lawsuit to the Medan District Court with a demand for an unlawful act committed by the creditor as a defendant as regulated in article 1365 of the Civil Code. As for the problem in this research is to know how the basis of judges' consideration in solving the problems related to unlawful acts in the dispute on the object of mortgage auction based on the decision number: 192 / Pdt.G / 2016 / PN Mdn and how the legal effect received by the parties related to the rights and sanctions against the deed Against the law in the dispute on the object of mortgage auction based on the decision number: 192 / Pdt.G / 2016 / PN Mdn. The theory used is the theory of legal certainty, benefit, justice and legal protection. Research Method is a juridical-normative approach that is legislation related to the problems studied by using secondary data consisting of: primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The result of this research is the basic consideration of the judge in the aquo case stating the plaintiff's claim is unacceptable because it is inadequate, unclear, blurred and imperfect based on the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia number 492 K / Sip / 1970 then the plaintiff's claim is rejected and the legal effect is punish The plaintiff to pay case fees. The conclusion is the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff wrongly by doing a regular lawsuit (a quo), should be a resistance suit (Verzet) because the auction object still belongs to the plaintiff. There is no unlawful act by the defendant because no legislation is violated. The act of the defendant under article 6 jo article 20 paragraph (1) of the Guardianship Law and the Panel of Judges of the Medan District Court sentenced the plaintiff under article 1365 of the Civil Code.