Pawning of heritage land (tanah pusako) is agenerally implemented by community inTilatang KamangDistrict, Nagari Koto Tangahof West Sumatera Province, Indonesia. There are some differences between the heritage land pawning agreement in the area with that have been regulated in Indonesian positive law. Therefore, the aim of this research was to study how tobind the pawn agreement over heritage land in Nagari Koto Tangah. The method of the study was using an empirical juridical approach. The data used in this study were primary data in the form of interviews and observations in the field, while secondary data consists of document learning. The result showed that the method of heritage land pawning agreement in Nagari Koto Tangah is carried out  ina written documents and is witnessed and known by the penghulu (tribal chief) of  each party, and  Nagari Koto Tangah already manage the ruleof  the registration of the land pawn agreement.

Debt collateral is often unacceptable to the execution of debt collateral because there is coercion and leads to court so that many debts are not collected. In Minangkabau customary law, there is no compulsion to pay off debts. This research answers how people make debt-receivables agreements and must be repaid by the debtors in the Minangkabau customary law arrangement in Sungai Dareh village, West Sumatra. This research method is through observation and interviews of local customary leaders. The implementation of the pattern of execution of debt collateral settlement in Minangkabau is motivated by the legal relationship between the creditor and the collateral in the form of land. The creditor only has the right to cultivate or take the proceeds from the land given by the debt recipient until the debt is paid off or redeemed by the debt recipient, so that debt settlement will never transfer ownership rights to the land. In an urgent situation, the creditor can transfer the debt to the new lender, which stops the legal relationship between the first creditor and the debt recipient and creates a new legal relationship between the second creditor and the debt recipient. Creditors' rights remain a priority, and there is no time limit in paying off debts. This debt settlement is very different from debt settlement in positive law in Indonesia. The creditor has the right to sell the land as collateral for the debt if the debt cannot be settled after a certain period, which results in the loss of ownership of the debt recipient over the land that is used as debt collateral. There is a need for positive legal reform in Indonesia regarding the execution of debt guarantees.

The analysis of Article 51 PP 24/1997 explains the registration of the transfer of rights as yet there is no inheritance distribution, so that the inheritance is still in joint ownership, when the right holders agree to share their rights into the rights of each right holder then inheritance based on a joint rights deed made by PPAT. Article 111 paragraph (4) and paragraph 5 PMNA / KBN 3/1997 explain that at the time of registration of the transfer of rights if the heirs agree to give rights to inherited land to one person, it can be proven by deed of deed in the form of deed Notary or in the form deed under the hand. Implementation in Bukittinggi, registration of the transfer of rights cannot use the deed of distribution of inheritance which is carried out in conjunction with the process of inheritance but must be based on the deed of distribution of joint rights made by PPAT. The research issue raised in this article is to find out how the drafting of sharing of joint rights in the transfer of land due to inheritance? how is the distribution of inheritance to land as a joint asset in the family? The approach used by researchers is an Empirical Juridical approach. The results showed that the sharing of shared rights was made with a joint deed of rights distribution by PPAT with due observance to the provisions of Article 51 of Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997. Distribution of inheritance to land as shared assets in the family in the city of Bukittinggi was based on an agreement between the heirs to give up their rights-however, as to who the heirs are entitled to, the land is based on the Civil Code applicable to the testator.