Only plaintiff can drop lawsuit, 'despite settlement'

Only plaintiff can drop lawsuit, 'despite settlement'

JAKARTA (JP): An official defended on Friday the Supreme
Court's decision in 1998 to continue the hearing and issue the
verdict of a 1991 land dispute, despite the two disputed parties
having settled the matter out of court.

The Supreme Court's director for civil cases Harifin A. Tumpa
said that despite the settlement deal, the only party eligible to
request a halt to the Supreme Court's hearing was the plaintiff.

"It's useless for the party being sued to ask the Supreme
Court to drop the suit, even if a settlement deal has been
signed. The case will still go to court," Harifin told The
Jakarta Post.

He was referring to the Supreme Court's decision to issue a
verdict in 1998 over the 1991 land dispute between businessman
Bustami and the plaintiff Benyamin Laoh, despite the fact that
both parties signed a settlement deal in 1994.

Harifin admitted that the Supreme Court had received the
request for a halt of the Court's hearing, but said that the
request was filed by Bustami, instead of Benyamin.

"Even if Djunaidi says that both parties had requested the
Supreme Court to drop the civil lawsuit, I have evidence here
stating that only Djunaidi has requested that the lawsuit be
dropped," he said, referring to Bustami's lawyer.

"It's useless. It's Benyamin who should ask for this, not
Bustami or his lawyer."

Earlier, Djunaidi accused Supreme Court officials of having
lost the written agreement.

"The negligence of the officials has led the Supreme Court to
give judgment in favor of the other party in the case, Benyamin
Laoh," Djunaidi said on Wednesday.

In a ruling issued in 1998, the Supreme Court ordered Bustami
to return the disputed 633 square meters of land on Jl. Tanah
Tinggi Timur in Central Jakarta to Benyamin.

Harifin said the issue should not be the ruling anymore, but
the settlement deal.

"This settlement deal binds both parties and if both abide by it,
the Supreme Court ruling has no effect... it's meaningless. The
problem arises when one party tries to neglect the deal, say for
instance, Benyamin," Harifin said.

"If that's the case, Bustami has the right to sue Benyamin,
based on the settlement deal," he said, while citing Article 1338
of the Civil Code on written agreements.

Harifin dismissed the allegations that Court officials had
lost the copy of the settlement deal, while showing the Post the
original copy of the deal, which the Supreme Court received on
Nov. 20, 1996, two years before the verdict was issued on Oct. 5,
1998.

"If my people lost documents, an investigation would be
carried out. The Supreme Court decided to try the case since the
lawsuit was never legally dropped, despite the settlement. Not
because of loss of documents," he said.

Separately, Djunaidi told the Post on Friday that if
Harifin had taken the time to read the settlement deal, which is
in the form of a booklet, he would not have said that only the
litigant had the right to revoke the civil lawsuit.

"In that settlement deal, it is clearly stated that both
parties will not consider any verdict on this case, and that both
the plaintiff and the party being sued, had the full right to
revoke the lawsuit from the Supreme Court," Djunaidi said.

"When this case reached the courtroom, the pages in that
booklet, which stated the following, were gone. I have the
original copy of the booklet, and so does Harifin."

In 1991, the local district court rejected an action brought
by Benyamin against Bustami over the disputed land. Benyamin lost
and appealed to the High Court, which also ruled against him in
1993.

Benyamin then appealed the case to the Supreme Court in the
following year, and won in 1998.

Djunaidi said that Benyamin -- after filing his appeal with
the Supreme Court -- approached his client asking to settle the
case out of court. Bustami finally agreed to pay Benjamin Rp 175
million (US$20,114) in settlement of the dispute.

The settlement deal between the parties was then forwarded to
the Supreme Court in July 1994, the lawyer said, which was denied
by Harifin, who said that the Supreme Court received it in 1996.

Bustami only realized that he had lost the case, according to
Djunaidi, when he learned that the appeal had been heard by the
Supreme Court without his knowledge.

Djunaidi said his client wanted the Supreme Court to review
the case since its officials had lost copies of the settlement
deal.

In the letter to Ketut, Djunaidi said his client had legally
purchased the land for Rp 150 million from Benyamin in 1991, but
that the latter had then claimed that the land deal had been
canceled and that he had returned Rp 125 million to Bustami.
(ylt)