The term "interlocutory order" does not find any specific definition attributed to it in the statutory provisions of Civil Procedure Code of 1908 or ..

 The term "interlocutory order" does not find any specific definition attributed to it in the statutory provisions of Civil Procedure Code of 1908 or the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972. The ordinary meaning of an interlocutory order or judgment is given in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary to be "(of a decree or judgment) given provisionally during the course of a legal action". In the Black's Law Dictionary Fifth Edition, the term "interlocutory" has been defined as "Provisional' interim; temporary; not final, something intervening between the commencement and the end of a suit which decides some point or matter, but is not a final decision of the whole controversy". Similarly, the term "interim" has been defined in the Black's Law Dictionary Fifth Edition as "in the meantime; meanwhile; temporary, between". In Volume-II of Words and Phrases by Mian Muhibullah Kakakhel, interlocutory has been defined as "An application or order or judgment which is made during the pendency of an action and has not the intention or effect of finally determining it".

The test to determine the finality of an order is whether the judgment or order finally disposed of the rights of the parties. The finality must be a finality in relation to the suit. If after the order, the suit is still alive suit in which the rights of the parties have still to be determined, no appeal lies against it. The fact that the order decides an important and even a vital issue is by itself not material. If the decision on an issue put an end to the suit, the order will undoubtedly be a final one, but if the suit is still left alive and has got to be tried in the ordinary way, no finality could attach to the order. A bare reading of subsection (3) of the section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 thus clearly provides that no appeal is competent against an interim order.

Intra Court Appeal No. 81 0f 2020

Muhammad Sher Awan . Vs.Government of the Punjab, through Chief Secretary Lahore and six others.