Pembatalan Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Terkait Pembayaran Objek Jual Beli (Studi Putusan Nomor 27/Pdt.G/2019/Pn Krs)

Abstract

The Sale and Purchase Binding Agreement (Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli/PPJB), as an authentic deed, carries perfect evidentiary strength regarding its contents unless proven otherwise. In the case examined under Decision No. 27/Pdt.G/2019/PN Krs, the Panel of Judges annulled a PPJB stating full payment on the grounds of breach of contract commited by Surya Effendi in his agreement with Suwarno, namely by failing to make payment for the land being transtacted. The evidentiary assessment concerning the truth of the PPJB’s content particularly the payment for the land object-forms the basis of this study, which addresses three issues: (1) What is the legal force of a PPJB executed by a Notary as a binding authentic deed between the parties? (2) What are the implications for the restoration of the parties’ right following the cancellation of the PPJB? and (3) How should the judicial considerations and the Judge’s decision in Decision No. 27/Pdt.G/2019/PN Krs regarding the cancellation of the PPJB be analysed. This study employs a normative legal research method by examining contractual provisions within the Indonesian Civil Code and Regulations governing notarial deeds under Law No. 2 of 2014 corncerning the Office of The Notary. Data were collected through a literature-based approach using secondary sources, including statutory regulations, textbooks, journals, and relevant scholary materials and analyzed qualitatively. The study finds that the Judge erred in considering the annulment of the PPJB in Decision No. 27/Pdt.G/2019/PN Krs. The assessment of payment for the land object was based on witness testimony unrelated to the processof executing the deed. Such judicial reasoning fails to adhere to Article 16 paragraph (1) letter m of Law No. 2 of 2014 on the Office of the Notary, which requires that the execution of a notarial deed be witnessed by at least two witnesses. This ruling consequently undermines the legal certainly of the PPJB’s evidentiary value as an authentic deed that possesses perfect legal force unless rebutted by contrary evidence. The Panel of Judges should have further examined the relevant provisions and procedures governing the execution of a PPJB deed to ensure legal certainty regarding its binding evidentiary status.