THE GOOD-FAITH PRINCIPLE FOR BUYERS OF MORTGAGED HOUSES: ANALYSIS OF DECISIONS AT THREE COURT LEVELS

Abstract

A house sale creates reciprocal obligations: the seller must deliver the property, and the buyer must pay the price. Disputes arise when part of the price remains unpaid, no Deed of Sale and Purchase (AJB) is executed before a Land Deed Official (PPAT), and the registered owner encumbers the land with a Mortgage Right. This article examines whether a buyer who paid a down payment and occupied the house qualifies as a good-faith purchaser. Using normative legal research with statutory and case approaches, it analyses Pekanbaru District Court Decision Number 7/Pdt.G/2025/PN Pbr, Riau High Court Decision Number 180/PDT/2025/PT PBR, and Supreme Court Decision Number 1555 K/Pdt/2026. The agreement and receipt proved a binding sale but neither transferred ownership nor fulfilled the good-faith purchaser criteria under Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 4 of 2016. Under the privity principle, the buyer’s personal claim could not defeat the bank’s registered Mortgage Right, and unlawful-act claims against the bank and Third Defendant failed. A default claim against the seller was the more suitable remedy.