At the beginning of August 2012, the plaintiff had acceded to the first defendant's request to use the plaintiff's land to secure additional capital for his car dealership. The first defendant undertook with the plaintiff to repay the additional loan he had obtained from the second defendant, leveraging the plaintiff's land as security, and to immediately return to the plaintiff the title to the plaintiff's property. On 31 August 2012, the first and second defendants executed a mudharabah agreement, pursuant to which the first defendant borrowed IDR 120 million. The plaintiff acted as witness. When the first defendant defaulted on the loan repayments, the second defendant directed the co-defendant to auction the plaintiff's land, without any deliberation. The plaintiff claimed he had not received any form of remuneration and had had to bear the loss on his own. The plaintiff requested that the court find the first and second defendants in default, and the auctioning of the plaintiff's land to be unlawful.
The court, however, acceded to the objection of the second defendant and co-defendant, finding that it was not authorised to adjudicate the case as the parties had agreed on another forum to resolve disputes. It also concurred with the defendants that the plaintiff's power of attorney vis-a-vis his legal representation was null and void due to formulaic irregularities.