#Temporary injunction

[seemabhatnagar]

"High Court Upholds Injunction: Disputed Land Construction Halted Amid Ancestral Property Claims"

If the property is found to be Joint Hindu Family Property, any sale of a specific piece of land without partition is impermissible.

The case involves a dispute over land that was purchased by the petitioners.

The petitioners filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the temporary injunction orders passed by the 9th Civil Judge Junior Division and the order was affirmed by the 4th District Judge, Rewa. The injunction restrained the petitioners from raising construction on the land they purchased.

The respondents had filed a suit in 2012 seeking a declaration of title, partition, and injunction, along with challenging the validity of Wills and Sale Deeds related to the disputed property.

Ahmad Khan & Others v. Bhaskar D Datt & Others

Misc. Pet. 4060/2023

Before HC of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur

Heard by Hon'ble Mr. Justice G S Ahluwaia J

Legal Issue

Whether the temporary injunction issued by the lower courts was justified, particularly when the sale deeds were executed during a period when no injunction was in force, and whether Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act applies to these sale deeds executed during the pendency of the suit.

Argument of the parties

Petitioners submission: Argued that since the sale deeds were executed during a time when no temporary injunction was in force, they should not be restrained from constructing on the land. They also contended that the purchasers (petitioners) were bona fide buyers, and the injunction causes irreparable loss.

Respondents Submission: Claimed that the disputed property is ancestral and has not been partitioned, so the sale deeds executed by defendants were invalid. They argued that the land could not be alienated without partition, and the injunction was necessary to preserve the status quo.

Court's Observation

The Court observed that under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, any sale deed executed during the pendency of a suit does not become void but is subject to the final outcome of the suit. The Court also noted that if the property is found to be Joint Hindu Family Property, any sale of a specific piece of land without partition is not permissible. Therefore, the lower courts' temporary injunction was appropriate to prevent potential irreparable harm.

Order:

The petition was dismissed by the High Court, the Court didn't found any jurisdictional error in the orders passed by the trial and appellate courts. The temporary injunction order restraining the petitioners from raising construction was upheld.

Seema Bhatnagar

[william-r-melich]

Shame on the Appeals Court - 03/20/2024

Late yesterday, the 5th Circuit Federal Appeals Court blocked Texas with a temporary injunction from enforcing their SB4 law which would allow Texas to arrest and deport migrants who enter their state illegally. Earlier yesterday, the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) issued an emergency appeal to remove a previous stay that was blocking SB4, a huge win for Texas. I didn't know that a Supreme Court appeal could be blocked by a lower Federal Court of Appeals, and they did so in the same day, crazy. So, Texas went from celebrating a victory for border security, to going back to being angrily frustrated at not being able to stop the stampede of illegal crossings. The 5ht circuit is entertaining arguments today on whether to stay the injunction, pending the outcome of an appeal at the SCOTUS.

“A majority of the panel has concluded that the administrative stay entered by a motions panel on March 2, 2024, should be lifted,” the unsigned order by the court reads. Yesterday, on March 19th, circuit judge Andrew Oldman disagreed: “I would leave that stay in place pending tomorrow’s oral argument on the question.” That was just hours after the SCOTUS had rejected an emergency request from the Biden jackasses to look at the administrative stay directed by the 5th Circuit's prior panel. The DOJ's (Department of Justice) stance on the law is that it violates the Constitution's Supremacy Clause which declares that states do not have the right to enforce immigration laws.

As per usual with emergency appeals, the Supreme Court did not give a reason for issuing their order. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amey Coney Barrett issued aligning opinions. Barrett wrote on regarding actions of the high court: “never reviewed the decision of a court of appeals to enter—or not enter—an administrative stay.” She continued, that it is “unwise to invite emergency litigation in this Court about whether a court of appeals abused its discretion at this preliminary step.”

Liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson had dissenting opinions. Sotomayor said the order “invites further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement.” She went on to write that the law “upends the federal-state balance of power that has existed for over a century, in which the National Government has had exclusive authority over entry and removal of noncitizens.” - I say, bullstit! States have always had the legal right and shared responsibility for protecting their sovereignty. Yesterday, the Mexican government said that it will not accept any illegal migrants coming back to them no matter what. They said that anyone deported who is not a Mexican citizen does not have to be accepted by them.

All governor Abbott wants to do is to enforce the laws to keep his state safe and secure, and the Biden commies are doing everything they can to impede that. It's disgusting! Will this nightmare ever end? I sure hope so.

[seo-changbinnies]

i have a post queued for tomorrow i promise i'm still a cc

[neopals]

NOT THE MODHAUS UPDATE CALLING THEM FORMER LOONA MEMBERS

[leemarkies]

i love how my mind is live laugh love da rn but that isn't stopping me from coming up with the most insane swtor thoughts

[collapsedsquid]

The university system sued United Auto Workers Local 4811 on Tuesday even though both sides have competing unfair practice labor claims pending before the California Public Employment Relations Board, which declined twice to issue an emergency injunction.

Alright graduate students and postdocs, disregard the injunction now is the time to take over the university with a students & researcher's soviet

[robertreich]

The Truth About Trumponomics

Trump and Republicans want to wreck your bank account. Here are 5 things you need to know about Trumponomics.

1.Trump wants tax cuts for the rich, at your expense.

Trump’s tax cuts for the rich and big corporations added about $1.7 trillion to the national debt, with few benefits trickling down to the middle class — in fact, it raised taxes for more than 10 million American families.

Now Trump and Republicans want to make the tax cuts for the rich permanent, blowing up the debt even further. And then they’ll use that debt to justify this:

2. Trump would cut Social Security and Medicare — programs you’ve been paying into!

In every year of his presidency, Trump submitted a budget that tried to cut Social Security and Medicare. And he knows that’s the only way he can even begin to pay for extending his tax cuts for the rich.

3. Trump and his allies are pro-junk fee.

When the Biden administration issued a rule capping credit card late fees at $8, Sen. Tim Scott, a Trump surrogate, tried to overturn it in the Senate. And then a Trump-appointed judge issued a temporary injunction that blocked the rule from taking effect. Eliminating that rule would cost American families an estimated $10 billion a year.

And when the Biden administration required airlines to issue automatic refunds for canceled flights, Trump’s allies in Congress fought to block that too.

When Trump was in office, his administration fought against efforts to rein in airline junk fees.

Corporations nickel and diming us like this makes inflation worse. If Trump gets back in the White House, buckle up for more junk fees.

4. Trump would send health care costs soaring.

Republicans have committed to repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, which would strip Medicare of the ability to negotiate drug prices, and let Big Pharma send the price of insulin and other life-saving medicines back through the roof.

And Trump is still fixated on repealing Obamacare, with no plan to replace it.

TRUMP: Obamacare is a disaster. We’re gonna do something about it.

That would strip coverage from tens of millions of Americans, drive up premiums, and let insurers charge more or deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions.

5, If you’ve got student debt, you’re out of luck with Trump.

In contrast to President Biden, who’s canceled more than $160 billion of student debt so far, Trump is against student debt relief. In his first term, he tried to eliminate the popular Public Service Loan Forgiveness program for people like teachers and nurses, and he’s called the idea of debt relief “unfair.”

What’s unfair, is how student debt hurts not just the roughly 40 million Americans burdened by it, but the entire economy, since Americans with debt have less money to spend, are less likely to start a business, less likely to buy a home, and more likely to rely on government assistance.

The MAGA agenda would make nearly every aspect of your life more expensive, while making the richest Americans even richer.

Teddy Roosevelt’s economic plan was called the Square Deal. Franklin Roosevelt’s was the New Deal.

What Trump is offering is simply a Raw Deal.

[anistarrose]

We're sick and tired of voting discourse. I'm sick and tired of voting discourse. So this is going to be the last thing I say, for all of 2024, about "voting discourse":

No, the Democrats won't save us; no, voting is not a substitute for direct action. But not voting makes direct action harder. Repeat that to yourself until you're not going to forget it. Not voting makes direct action harder. Not voting makes direct action harder.

What kind of direct action do you care about? Copwatching? Filming the police? The Arizona legislature tried its hardest to outlaw that. While controlled by Republicans. In case you couldn't guess. (The judge that overturned that law was an Obama appointee.)

Donating to bail funds? Georgia's Republican legislature effectively outlawed said bail funds, barring a temporary court injunction (issued by a Biden appointee). The U.S. House has been angling towards similar moves against bail funds, which have so far not reached the Senate.

Do you care about protesting? If you want to minimize your chance of getting jailed for it — not completely eliminate, but minimize — then you have to pay attention to your county prosecutor election. Care about harm reduction via needle exchanges, and test strips for drug users? You have to care about your city council. I'm genuinely sorry about that one, because I hate the struggle of finding information on local candidates too — but you have to, I have to, we all have to.

Yes, of course it's naive to pretend voting will fix all our problems. Of course it's naive to think Democrats are our best friends. But you know what else is naive? Mumbling some excuse of "direct action is better" when people ask why you're not voting, and then not thinking at all about how election outcomes will affect the direct action you purport to value. So like. Think about that.

[whatbigotspost]

FUCK YES!!!!

Still so far from over and only a temporary situation but thank god for ANY positive news out of the flaming dumpster fire that is this state’s* politics. Especially when it comes to trans folks.

We’ll see where this goes from here.

*people with no connection or first hand experience with Texas DO NOT ADD ANY ANTI TEXAS CHATTER to this post please. It’s not the place or time and you don’t kick friends when they’re down anyway. Talk about where you live/know please bc there’s a 100%, 50 out of 50 chance you’re being governed by terrible laws and governments

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this New York Times story:

The Supreme Court temporarily put on hold on Thursday an Environmental Protection Agency plan to curtail air pollution that drifts across state lines, dealing another blow to the Biden administration’s efforts to protect the environment.

The ruling followed recent decisions chipping away at the agency’s authority to address climate change and water pollution.

Under the proposal, known as the “good neighbor” plan, factories and power plants in Western and Midwestern states must cut ozone pollution that drifts into Eastern ones. The emissions cause smog and are linked to asthma, lung disease and premature death.

The ruling was provisional, but even the temporary loss for the administration will suspend the plan for many months and maybe longer.

The vote was 5 to 4. Writing for the majority, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said the court’s ruling was modest, pausing the administration’s plan in light of developments in lower courts. He said the Supreme Court’s stay would remain in place while a federal appeals court in Washington considered the matter and, after that, until the Supreme Court acts on any appeal.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by the court’s three liberal members, issued a spirited dissent predicting that the majority had created a “yearslong exercise in futility.”

“Given the number of companies included and the timelines for review,” she wrote, “the court’s injunction leaves large swaths of upwind states free to keep contributing significantly to their downwind neighbors’ ozone problems for the next several years.”

She called one argument set out in the majority opinion “a feeble response.” Another, she said, “throws at the wall a cherry-picked assortment of E.P.A. statements.”

“None stick,” she added.

Vickie Patton, general counsel of the Environmental Defense Fund, criticized the majority’s approach as reckless.

[fiftysevenacademics]

As such, I would like to extend the understanding of the inn beyond its perceived function as a setting or aesthetic device, and suggest that the inn is a repository of meaning that allows the imaginative enactment of concerns regarding family and its protection, the limits of human sociability, and the containment of violence. These considerations can play out in the space provided by the inn because of its marginal nature, which is juxtaposed against family or clan-centred spaces undergirded by a family-centred conception of society. It serves as a place of shelter, from elements, from man and animal, but it is not a family residence with familiar associations, entrenched within the community and locale. The inn offers shelter to strangers and itinerants, rather than to the known, familial, and sedentary. It is thus an unstable shelter, temporary and ad hoc, and articulates anxieties about the protection and security of persons within places of shelter. It also represents both a central and marginal space for human sociability: a quasi-safe resting place for the traveller away from home and hearth for those who share the fellowship of the road and the promise of aid conveyed by the expression, ‘Within the four seas, all men are brothers (sihai zhi nei jie xiongdi ye 四海之内皆兄弟也)’ (Analects XII.5). The use of familial terms implies a fictive family formed by shared experience, yet this temporary alliance is not anchored by shared and known family, clan, or hometown histories. Hence, this conviviality and alliance are precarious and uncertain, always subject to the possibility of danger and violence, perhaps even debasement and de-humanisation. The unwary traveller may lose not only his goods but his life, his bodily integrity sundered and his remains scattered beyond the possibility of proper burial (si wu quan shi 死无全尸), anathema to the Confucian injunction to preserve the integrity of the person and the physical body.

The Inn in Wuxia Narratives, Janice Kam. IN: China from the Margins Edited By Emily Williams, Routledge, 2024.

(This is why your boyfriend can tie you up and parade you around in front of his disciples at an inn but not at Cloud Recesses.)

[girlactionfigure]

🟪 STRIKE & DEAL UPDATES - Monday morning, events from Israel

ISRAEL REALTIME - Connecting to Israel in Realtime

▪️ARAB IMPRESSION.. "The Israeli enemy is exhausted and its military leadership is begging for a solution despite all the threats to expand the war on the northern front with Lebanon."

▪️STRIKE UPDATES..

.. The Legal Adviser to the Government instructed the Attorney's Office to contact the Labor Court with a request that it issue injunctions for the Histadrut strike.

.. This morning at 10:30 a hearing at the Labor Court. The request for a restraining order was submitted by the Bereaved Families' Heroes Forum.

.. The State to the High Court: According to the position of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, the announced strike is political and was announced against the law. Requesting a temporary order in ex parte status.

.. Hearing postponed until 12:00 by the court.

.. Despite the position of the attorney general that the strike is political and illegal, the workers' committee of the attorney general’s office continues to shut down the office.

.. The Chairman of the Airports Authority Workers' Committee, Pinchas Idan, is in danger of being removed from the Likud, in light of his position aligning with Def. Min. Galant.

.. Jerusalem light rail closed until 12:00.

.. Mayor of Kiryat Shmona: “When we asked for a strike to speed up the return home (for those evacuated from the north), you said, "I don't want to involve the Histadrut in politics."

.. Histadrut official: They are considering continuing the strike tomorrow as well.

🔶DEAL NEWS.. Hamas leader Sinwar's deputy, Khalil al-Hiya, who is in charge of negotiations in Hamas - “As long as the Palestinian prisoners are not released, as long as the war does not stop, as long as the army does not withdraw from the Strip and especially from Netzarim and Philadelphi - there will be no agreement.  There is no real negotiation. In the last two weeks, they are just grinding water.

We showed great flexibility - instead of our demand for the release of 500 Palestinian prisoners for each male and female soldier and 250 Palestinian prisoners for each civilian, we agreed to drop to 50 prisoners for each female soldier and 30 prisoners for each civilian.

A permanent ceasefire is a condition for the deal.”

.. AMERICANS SAY.. The Biden administration is preparing a new and final proposal to end the war in Gaza.

.. Official Russian media: Russia is investing efforts to bring about the release of Alexander (Sasha) Trufanov, who is kidnapped in Gaza.

🔴TERROR ATTEMPT - CAR BOMB - ATERET.. (Israeli town in Samaria, 10 km east of Modi’in) A car bomb was neutralized at the entrance to the town of Ateret in Binyamin. There are no casualties. Binyamin connector road is closed to traffic.  Two large natrual-gas tanks were found connected to a detonator.

♦️JENIN.. The IDF says it carried out a drone strike against a group of Arabs hurling explosive devices at troops during the ongoing operation in Jenin.

⭕No rocket or suicide drone attacks overnight.  Analysts say they don’t want to interrupt the strikes (yes, this is real - they watch the Israeli news and plan the impact of their actions).

[rapeculturerealities]

Texas abortion bans lifted temporarily for medical emergencies, judge rules | WBUR

A Texas judge has ruled in favor of a group of women and doctors who sued the state over medical exceptions in its abortion laws.

The women argued that the state's abortion bans lack clarity, putting patients in danger during medically complicated pregnancies.

In her ruling, Travis County District Judge Jessica Mangrum writes that "uncertainty regarding the scope of the medical exception and the related threat of enforcement of Texas's abortion bans" creates a risk that doctors "will have no choice but to bar or delay the provision of abortion care to pregnant persons in Texas for whom an abortion would prevent or alleviate a risk of death or risk to their health...for fear of liability under Texas's abortion bans."

The judge issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the laws from being enforced against health care professionals who provide abortions in emergency medical situations based on their "good faith judgment."

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The fact the Saskatchewan government went outside its borders to find an expert to consult in crafting its controversial new education policy is being questioned by some critics. The policy to require parental consent for students under the age of 16 to change their names or pronouns at school was formulated and announced this summer, then challenged in court. After a Court of King's Bench judge granted a temporary injunction that halted the policy until a full hearing could be held, the government opened an emergency session of the Legislature last week and introduced legislation that invokes the nothwithstanding clause to override sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.  Court documents filed in response to the UR Pride Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity's challenge over the constitutionality of the initial policy have shown that the government cited one expert it relied on in coming up with the policy: Dr. Erica Anderson. 

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[probablyasocialecologist]

A federal judge issued a temporary injunction this month that partially blocked enforcement of Florida’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. In a 44-page opinion, Judge Robert Hinkle offered a lengthy rebuke of the arguments presented by the state of Florida to medically justify banning gender-affirming care—which happen to be many of the same arguments that corporate media have uncritically parroted. In the ruling, Hinkle wrote: In support of their position, the defendants have proffered a laundry list of purported justifications for the statute and rules. The purported justifications are largely pretextual and, in any event, do not call for a different result. To bolster their legal case, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration hired consultants and expert witnesses from anti-trans organizations, including the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds), which has been designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, to make false and misleading claims about the science behind gender-affirming care. Right-wing media outlets regularly give such sources a platform to make those claims (e.g., Fox News 3/30/23; New York Post, 1/30/23; Federalist, 2/1/23), but centrist outlets, too, often credulously air such claims, laundering them for a mainstream audience.