H He imposition of mortgage rights must fulfill both formal and material aspects as stipulated in statutory regulations. the problem addressed in this research is whether the process of imposing mortgage rights in decision number 226/pdt.g/2022/pn skt complies with the applicable laws and regulations governing mortgage rights, and what the legal consequences are of the imposition process in that decision. the type of research used is normative juridical. the nature of the research is descriptive. the data used are secondary data obtained through literature study, analyzed qualitatively. conclusions are drawn deductively.the imposition of mortgage rights on land that does not comply with legal provisions—carried out by stealing the land certificate and forging the identity and signature of the land rights holder for use in a credit facility agreement—is not in accordance with the prevailing mortgage law. this unlawful act results in legal consequences such as the issuance of the power of attorney to impose mortgage (surat kuasa membebankan hak tanggungan or skmht), the deed of granting mortgage (akta pemberian hak tanggungan or apht), and the mortgage certificate, all of which were established unlawfully. moreover, the creditor in this case loses their legal standing, and the land rights holder suffers losses.the resolution of this issue involved the original certificate owner taking legal action by filing a lawsuit for an unlawful act (perbuatan melawan hukum) at the surakarta district court. the court ruling declared the credit agreement deed, skmht, and apht null and void by operation of law; the mortgage certificate was deemed invalid; and the sukoharjo land office was ordered to delete (roya) the registered mortgage right.