TIONO SETIAWAN CONTRACTED IN 1997 WITH THE OWNER, SUKMA WIJAYA. KNOWING THE LAND WAS CERTIFIED IN 2018.

Tangerang, INDONESIAPOS.NET.

The continued trial of the civil case involving Defendants I and VI presented five factual witnesses on Wednesday, January 28, 2026. Witness Jamil has been renting the land since 2018.

“I have a contract agreement,” Jamil firmly answered the plaintiff’s attorney at the Tangerang City District Court, Banten.

“I have a one-year contract for 7 million rupiah per year,” he replied.

“Yes, I have been renting the land since 2018 with Mr. H. Sukma Wijaya,” the witness stated clearly in response to the plaintiff’s attorney’s questions.

The witness was unaware of the land contract.

“I only knew I could run a business from renting it. Currently, my younger brother manages the business,” Jamil said.

When given the opportunity to question witnesses by the panel of judges, Wawan, the plaintiff, did not respond. Wawan, the son of the late Abu Saleh and his second wife, was the plaintiff.

Meanwhile, witness Afrizal rented a business in 2017 for making iron fences. Witness Taufiq rented a business in 2020 for building materials.

H. Hanafi rented a business in 2018 for buying and selling wooden plastic pallets. Meanwhile, the contractor, Tiono, was present as a witness.

He explained that he initially rented vacant land for a materials business in 1997 and built it himself to sell materials to this day.

Regarding the land ownership certificate in the name of Sukma Wijaya, the witness knew that the land leased in 1997 had been certified by Mr. Haji Sukma Wijaya in 2018.

According to witness Gabin, no one has objected to renting the disputed land.

“I know the certificate is in the name of the late H. Sukma Wijaya,” the witness stated clearly before the panel of judges.

After the trial, the witness and defendant were having coffee at a food stall not far from the Tangerang District Court. Coincidentally, the editor-in-chief of matapost.com was having lunch at the same stall.

Suddenly, the plaintiff’s group entered the stall to eat. The plaintiff’s family provoked the defendant’s and witness’s families. The atmosphere calmed down, and the witness and defendant’s family left the stall.

According to Setia Dharma, SH.MH., this shouldn’t have happened. The trial matter is over.

Courtroom matters shouldn’t be brought outside, let alone intentionally causing a fight in a public place, especially in a food stall where people eat and drink,” the beautiful lawyer said with a smile.

According to Setia Dharma, the defendant’s attorney, to matapost.com, the land has been under his control since the 1960s.

Sukma Wijaya, while still a rice paddy, began renting out the land along the main road in 1997.

Landowner Sukma Wijaya employed another person, Mr. Saleh, to work the rice fields, sharing the profits after the rice harvest.

The land area is 1,400 hectares, while the lawsuit only covers 13 hectares. The plaintiff filed the lawsuit based on a copy of the village tax records.

Meanwhile, we, as defendants, hold a land ownership certificate (SHM) in the name of Sukma Wijaya. After Sukma Wijaya’s death in 2021, the land was controlled by his heirs, which remains the case to this day.

Suddenly, Abu Saleh’s heirs began to dispute the land in 2022, after Sukma Wijaya’s death.

According to the defendant’s attorney, Setia Dharma, why did they only raise the issue after Sukma Wijaya’s death?

During his lifetime, Abu Saleh himself never questioned the land being cultivated by Mr. Saleh at Sukmawijaya’s request, sharing the harvest with Sukmawijaya. In fact, in 1997, he even leased it to Tiono.

No one objected, indicating that the land was not actually Abu Saleh’s property.

However, Abu Saleh’s descendants argued as if the land were an inheritance from their late father, Abu Saleh.

(PLAY)