Chronology of Teddy Pardiyana's Dispute with Sule's Children, Legal Counsel: the Problem is not Gono Gini

Kapanlagi.com - The dispute involving Teddy Pardiyana, Putri Delina, and Rizky Febian is getting heated. Just a while ago, Teddy even called Putri a thief, which made Sule angry.

Regarding this family issue, Teddy Pardiyana's legal counsel finally speaks up. When met by KapanLagi.com a while ago, the legal counsel of Lina Zubaedah's ex-husband clarified the matter from his client's perspective.

"I am only providing clarification that the problem here is not gono gini. So Teddy's sibling should not have a problem with gono gini with the deceased," said Ali Nurdin, Teddy Pardiyana's legal counsel when met in Jakarta, not long ago.

"This is what needs to be clarified, the issue is about how when one person passes away, there will be inheritance, and this inheritance needs to be divided," he continued.

1. Unshared Legacy

© KapanLagi.com/Budy Santoso

Ali Nurdin asserts that the main issue here is not the marital property, but the unshared legacy of the late Lina Zubaedah for the heirs that has not been divided.

"Even though the deceased has children, has young children, and legally he is entitled to inherit his mother's legacy, even though Teddy is included in the heirs," said the legal representative.

"So, what needs to be clarified is that there is an issue where this one legacy has not been divided, not marital property," he added.

2. Chronology of the Issue

Furthermore, Ali Nurdin explained the chronology of the issue that caused his client to be dissatisfied and speak out about Lina Zubaedah's inheritance. It is mentioned that Putri Delina took the agreed-upon inheritance to be kept together without Teddy's knowledge.

"So, at the time of the death, the assets in the form of certificates and inheritance were controlled by Teddy, but because Teddy had good intentions and did not have malicious intent to take someone else's property, he invited Putri to store the inheritance in one of the private banks in Bandung," he said.

"But the problem arose when both Teddy and his child were storing it together, suddenly it was taken without their knowledge, at that time, that person took it there, the documents were taken, and only then did he say that it had been taken, it should not have been allowed if they were storing it together, it should have required both of them to take it, because both of them are heirs of the deceased," he concluded.

(kpl/far/rsp)