Medan, Batamnews - The Medan District Court has rejected the exception filed by PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo in the Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation (PKPU) case against PT Jaya Putra Kundur (JPK).

As a result, allegations of violations related to consumer protection laws are evident on the part of PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo.

It is known that the petitioner, PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo, registered the PKPU case with the Medan Commercial Court under Register Number 26/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2023/PN Niaga Mdn on June 23, 2023.

"The PKPU petition filed by PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo has been clearly rejected by the Medan Commercial Court, which covers the Kepri region," said Ade Darmawan, the Legal Representative of PT JPK, last Thursday (August 17).

Baca juga: Oalah, Pipa Air Batam Bocor Lagi, Daerah Terdampak Makin Banyak

In this case, the petitioner requested the panel of judges to accept, examine, and adjudicate several key matters. Namely, that between the petitioner and the PKPU respondent, there is a legal relationship of sale and purchase, where the petitioner in the PKPU is the buyer and the respondent is the seller.

Furthermore, the total number of shop units purchased by the petitioner in the PKPU amounts to 10 units in the Mitra Raya 2 Business Centre Point Complex, with a total value paid in full by the petitioner in the PKPU of IDR 19.5 billion.

Before the petitioner in the PKPU and the respondent in the PKPU handed over the shop unit keys, both parties had agreed that the costs of splitting and transferring the ownership of the ten certificates from the master certificate would be borne by the petitioner in the PKPU, amounting to IDR 20 million.

However, after the shop units were handed over and the petitioner in the PKPU took possession of them, the petitioner refused to pay the cost of splitting the ten land certificates, which had been previously agreed upon, amounting to IDR 200 million.

Baca juga: INFOGRAFIS: Bank Indonesia Kepri Cetak Sejarah di CERNIVAL 2023, Rekor Muri dan Prestasi Luar Biasa

Subsequently, the PKPU respondent sent a letter to the petitioner through their legal representative on July 16, 2022.

The main issue concerns Article 1 point 6 of the Bankruptcy and PKPU Law, and that the PKPU respondent in this case does not have a debt in the form of money or anything else, as the shop units have already been occupied and taken over by the petitioner in the PKPU.

Furthermore, the certificates that have not been handed over, due to the petitioner in the PKPU failing to fulfill their obligation, are not the subject of the PKPU.

The judge then rejected all of the petitioner's main claims, in accordance with the Supreme Court Chief's Decree number 109/KMA/SK/IV/2020, which must fulfill certain criteria.

Among them, the debtor has two or more creditors, has not paid off one due debt that can be collected, acknowledges the debt, and the debt can be proven by the petitioner.

"Here, there is no longer any connection to PT JPK. Clearly, the relevant authorities must also take into account the legally binding court decision. Thus, the cost of splitting certificates, which is an obligation of PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo to PT JPK, is a necessary matter," said Ade Darmawan.

He added that with this court decision, the relevant authorities should further investigate PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo in relation to the court decision. Thus, the entire legal process becomes neutral and not a tool for seeking fault through non-dynamic means.

Baca juga: Wakil Menteri Kominfo Ingatkan Bahaya Memposting Data Pribadi di Media Sosial setelah Jatuh Korban

"The relevant authorities are also requested to assess a matter clearly and objectively, as it is evident that this violates consumer protection laws, which do not cover certificate ownership rights, as this is clearly a civil matter. Therefore, civil action is necessary," Ade emphasized.

According to him, if people feel aggrieved, they shouldn't immediately report to the police. Therefore, he asked the relevant authorities to thoroughly examine consumer protection laws.

"And one more thing I want to emphasize is that the main perpetrator, PT Mitra Raya Sektarindo, has already been suspended, meaning that if the police suspend the detention of a suspect, it's because there are mitigating factors, and that's why this action was taken. And for other individuals like Mr. Thedy Johanis and Mr. Johanis, if they participated, they should not be prosecuted further, as the main perpetrator has already been released or, in legal terms, their detention has been suspended," he concluded.

Therefore PT JPK, Mr Thedy Johanis & Mr Johanis are not related to any fraud & embezzlement nor any criminal case.