Tinjauan Terhadap Penguasaan Harta Warisan Dalam Gugatan Rekonpensi Terhadap Perkara Perdata Nomor 213/PDT.G/2017/PN.Pbr

Arrahman, Fadhul (2020) Tinjauan Terhadap Penguasaan Harta Warisan Dalam Gugatan Rekonpensi Terhadap Perkara Perdata Nomor 213/PDT.G/2017/PN.Pbr. Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 151010313.pdf - Submitted Version Download (2MB)

Abstract

Plaintiff as one of the heirs, is as a legal heir from Alm. Theofela, it is legal according to the law that the object of the dispute is subsequently the property of the Plaintiff, namely as a legal heir to the inheritance of the Plaintiff's parents. However, in the consideration of the Panel of Judges of the Pekanbaru District Court, the Plaintiff rejected the Plaintiff's claim and received a counterclaim lawsuit from the Defendant, due to evidence in the form of Deed No. 5 dated November 3, 1976 concerning Deed of Relinquishing the Right to Inheritance. Whereas, as the writer knows, the Plaintiff and Defendant's parents died here in 1974, and how could the deed be made in 1976, even though the plaintiff and defendant's parents are gone. So according to the writer it is very unreasonable to be granted by the Panel of Judges of the Pekanbaru District Court, because it is very clear that the Plaintiffs are legitimate heirs and the existence of Deed Number 5 dated November 3, 1976 concerning the Deed of Relinquishing the Right to Inheritance seems to have been fabricated by the Defendant. In the research that the author did, set out the problem of How the Mastery of Inheritance in the Lawsuit on Resonance Against Civil Case Number 213 / Pdt.G / 2017 / PN Pdt.G / 2017 / PN.Pbr. This writing when viewed from the type of research classified as normative legal research that is research to study and explore and find answers about what should be of each problem studied consisting of 3 (three) primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. While the nature of this research is descriptive which means this study provides a clear and detailed description of the mastery of inheritance in a Lawsuit on Reconstruction of Civil Cases No. 213 / Pdt.G / 2017 / PN Pbr. Mastery of Inheritance in a Lawsuit on Respectance Against a Civil Case that the claimant's reconciliation in filing a claim for reconciliation is not accompanied by appropriate evidence and appears to have been fabricated and there is no connection with the mastery of the inheritance that he does. Meanwhile, the Defendant has given evidence that cannot be disproved by the Plaintiff's Plaintiff and here it is very clear that the Plaintiff's Plaintiff has committed an unlawful act in the possession of inherited property of the Defendant's Defendant's parents. The Legal Consideration of the Panel of Judges on the Control of Inheritance states that the Panel of Judges received a lawsuit from the Plaintiff of the Reconstruction on the grounds that there was evidence of the Deed of Agreement of Debt or Releasing the Right to Inheritance which was made by the Plaintiffs of the reconciliation in 1976 along with the deceased parents before a Notary Public. Pekanbaru Syawal Sutan Above. However, the Panel of Judges did not consider the evidence presented by the Defendant's Respondent in the hearing, even though there was a confession from the Reconception Plaintiff that the Defendant's Defendant was the biological brother of their father. Therefore Majellis, the judge of the Pekanbaru district court, was wrong in setting legal considerations regarding the case of control over the inheritance

Actions (login required)

View Item