<![CDATA[Retno Utari, Prof. Dr. Suhariningsih, S.H.,S.U., Shanti Riskawati, S.H.,M.Kn. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Jalan MT. Haryono No. 169, Malang 65145, Indonesia Telp: +62-341-553898, Fax: +62-341-566505 Email : enoretno31@gmail.com  ABSTRAK Terdapat permasalahan hukum dalam KUPS ketika dilakukannya pembebanan Hak Tanggungan atas beberapa Sertipikat Hak Atas Tanah. Pasal 2 ayat (2) UUHT memperbolehkan adanya Roya Partial ketika Hak Atas Tanah yang dijaminkan terdiri dari beberapa hak atas tanah, telah dilunasi sebagian utang, serta diperjanjikan dalam APHT. Bank Jatim justru membebankan beberapa Sertipikat Hak Atas Tanah tersebut menjadi satu kesatuan Hak Tanggungan, yang menimbulkan persoalan ketika kelompok (debitur) mengalami kredit bermasalah. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pelaksanaan perlindungan hukum preventif oleh Bank Jatim meliputi pembuatan perjanjian kredit yang dibatasi Pasal 1320 dan 1338 KUHPerdata yang diikuti pengikatan jaminan sepurna. Adanya Roya Partial dalam UUHT tidak dapat diterapkan dalam KUPS, meskipun telah dilunasi sebagian utang kreditnya karena sebelumnya tidak diperjanjikan Roya Partial dalam APHT. Pelaksanaan perlindungan hukum represif adalah restrukturisasi kredit dan eksekusi agunan tambahan bagi peternak yang tidak sanggup membayar angsuran kredit. Kata kunci : Roya Partial, Kredit Bermasalah, KUPS ABSTRACT A legal issue emerged in the loan given to support business in cow breeding when mortgage right was imposed on land deeds. Article 2 Paragraph (2) of Law on Mortgage Rights (further stated as UUHT) allows the practice of partial hypothec cancellation when the land deed put as collateral consists of several ownership rights of land, when debt has been partially paid over the collateral, and when there is agreement made over the Deed of Assigning Mortgage Right (APHT). Bank Jatim has set the imposition of the land deed along with the mortgage right, leading to an issue when the debtors encounter bad credit. The research result reveals that the implementation of preventive legal protection made by Bank Jatim comprises the contract regulated in Article 1320 and 1338 of Civil Code, followed by pure agreement of the collateral. The partial of hypothec cancellation in UUHT cannot be implemented in KUPS despite the fact that the debt has been fully paid back. It is simply because there is no agreement regarding the partial hypothec cancellation in APHT. Moreover, the implementation of repressive legal protection involves restructuring the credit and the execution of additional collateral for the cow breeders who are capable of paying the installment.  Keywords: partial hypothec cancellation, bad credit, KUPS]]>
