@phdthesis{digilib76440,
           month = {February},
           title = {STUDI TERHADAP PUTUSAN AKTA PERDAMAIAN NOMOR 137/PDT.G/2024/PN YYK},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 22103040037 Nahri Salsabila Zalda},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Surur Roiqoh, S.H.I., M.H.},
        keywords = {land dispute; mediation; Sultan Ground; PT Kereta Api Indonesia},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/76440/},
        abstract = {Land is an object that is highly susceptible to disputes, including disputes involving Sultan Ground land in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. The dispute between the Yogyakarta Sultanate and PT. Kereta Api Indonesia arose due to differing claims regarding the control and registration of land in the Tugu Railway Station area of Yogyakarta. PT. Kereta Api Indonesia recorded the land as part of its fixed assets based on Law Number 86 of 1958 concerning the Nationalization of Dutch-Owned Companies in Indonesia. In contrast, the Yogyakarta Sultanate, based on Law Number 13 of 2012 concerning the Special Status of the Special Region of Yogyakarta, claims that the land constitutes part of Sultan Ground, which is the property right of the Sultanate.
This research is a normative legal study employing a statutory approach and descriptive-analytical method. The data were obtained through library research of primary and secondary legal materials, as well as an analysis of the Peace Deed Decision Number 137/Pdt.G/2024/PN Yyk. The data were analyzed qualitatively by systematically describing and interpreting the findings to reach comprehensive conclusions.
The findings indicate that the mediation process was conducted in accordance with Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 2016 concerning Mediation Procedures in Court. The mediation resulted in a settlement agreement embodied in an akta van dading, which possesses final and binding legal force as well as executorial power. The success of the mediation in this case not only brought the dispute to a procedural end but also ensured legal certainty through judicial recognition of the parties? agreement and prevented the emergence of further disputes concerning the same object.}
}