ANALISIS PROSES PENYELESAIAN GUGATAN INTERVENSI TUSSENKOMST TERHADAP PERKARA PERDATA di PENGADILAN NEGERI SURABAYA (Studi Kasus Putusan Hakim Nomor 223/Pdt. G/2022/PN. Sby)

The background of this research is taken from the process of completing a civil settlement with the entry of a third party (Tussenkomst Intervention) at the Surabaya Class IA District Court with case registration number: 223/Pdt.G/2022/PN.Sby. In this case, the third party feels that they have the right to the object of dispute in the form of a Certificate of Ownership. However, the lawsuit filed by the Intervening Plaintiff is under the authority of the State Administrative Court but is filed against the District Court or is often referred to as Absolute Competence. The aim of this research is to determine the process of resolving the Tussenkomst intervention lawsuit in a civil case dispute at the Surabaya District Court Number 223/Pdt. G/2022/PN Sby and what legal considerations were used by the Panel of Judges in examining and trying the case. The method that the author uses in this research is an empirical juridical method. Meanwhile, the approach method used is a socio-legal approach. The result of this research is to know the mechanism for resolving cases if a third party wants to intervene (intervention) and the legal consequences of a lawsuit which should be the authority of the TUN court (absolute competence). So the author concludes that the process of resolving the intervention lawsuit (tussenkomst) in civil cases at the Surabaya District Court No. 223/Rev. G/2022/Pn. Sby has been implemented in accordance with the provisions of procedural law. However, there were several things that were overlooked in the judge's consideration, such as the application of the principle of nebis in idem. Apart from that, the statement also highlights the importance of considering the competence of a judiciary before filing a lawsuit by referring to the decision of the Head of the Surabaya City Land Office. This shows that this case is under the authority of the State Administrative Court and not the authority of the Surabaya District Court.