TL;DR: An interlocutory order is any order passed by a court during the pendency of a case, before the final judgment. An interim order is a specific type of interlocutory order that grants temporary relief for a defined period or until further orders. Every interim order is interlocutory, but not every interlocutory order is interim. The distinction matters because it determines whether the order can be immediately appealed or challenged, how long it survives, and what happens if the other party violates it. This guide explains both terms clearly, with the legal framework under the CPC, BNSS, and key Supreme Court judgments.
If you are involved in a court case and you have received or are seeking a court order before the final judgment, you will encounter these two terms. They are used often, sometimes interchangeably, by lawyers and courts. But they are not the same thing, and the difference between them has real consequences for your case.
This guide breaks both terms down from first principles, explains the legal framework under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, covers what the Supreme Court has said about when these orders can be challenged, and explains what this distinction means practically for a litigant.
What Is an Interlocutory Order
An interlocutory order is any order passed by a court during the pendency of a case, between the filing of the suit or proceedings and the final judgment or decree. It is not the final decision in the case. It is passed to manage the progress of the case, protect the interests of parties while the case is going on, or decide a preliminary or incidental question that arises during the proceedings.
The word interlocutory comes from the Latin “interloqui” meaning to speak between. An interlocutory order speaks between the start of a case and its end.
Examples of interlocutory orders include an order rejecting an application for amendment of pleadings, an order deciding whether a particular document is admissible in evidence, an order granting or refusing discovery, an order on a preliminary objection about jurisdiction, and an order granting or refusing a temporary injunction.
Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the concept of interlocutory orders flows from the distinction between a “decree” and an “order.” Section 2(2) defines a decree as the formal expression of an adjudication that conclusively determines the rights of the parties. Section 2(14) defines an order as the formal expression of any decision of a civil court which is not a decree. Everything between the institution of a suit and the final decree that a court formally decides falls within this framework.
What Is an Interim Order
An interim order is a specific subset of interlocutory orders. It is an order granting temporary relief to one party, for a specific period or pending the hearing of an application or pending the final disposal of the case.
The word “interim” means in the meantime. An interim order holds the position between two events, typically between the filing of an application and its hearing, or between the hearing and the final judgment.
The most common forms of interim orders are:
An interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC restraining a party from doing something, such as alienating property or continuing construction, until the injunction application or the main suit is decided.
An interim maintenance order passed in matrimonial proceedings directing one spouse to pay a specified amount to the other while the case is pending.
An interim custody order in a family matter giving temporary custody of a child to one parent pending the final determination.
A temporary stay of a decree or order while an appeal or revision is pending.
An interim protection order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 restraining the respondent from contacting the complainant.
What makes an order “interim” rather than simply “interlocutory” is its character as temporary relief. It does not decide the rights of the parties finally. It holds the field temporarily until the court has a full opportunity to hear the matter.
The Core Distinction: Three Categories from Shah Babulal Khimji
The Supreme Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania AIR 1981 SC 1736 laid down the most authoritative framework for understanding the different types of orders passed during litigation. The court identified three categories:
Category 1: Final judgment or decree. This conclusively determines the rights of the parties and ends the litigation before that court on the merits.
Category 2: Preliminary or interlocutory judgment that affects a valuable right. This is an order that, although passed before the final judgment, decides something that significantly affects a party’s substantive rights. An order refusing to add a party, an order striking out pleadings, or an order deciding a jurisdictional question all fall here. Such an order, though interlocutory in form, has the character of a judgment because it decides something that cannot easily be corrected even if the aggrieved party ultimately wins.
Category 3: Purely interlocutory order. This is an order of pure procedure that does not directly affect the rights of the parties on the merits. An order for adjournment, an order for discovery, an order about the mode of taking evidence. These are interlocutory in the fullest sense and generally not immediately appealable.
Interim orders of relief, such as injunctions and stays, fall somewhere between Category 2 and Category 3 depending on their impact. An interim injunction that protects significant property rights carries more weight than a procedural discovery order.
This three-category framework is essential because it determines what remedy is available when you want to challenge an order. Not all orders are immediately challengeable.
Ad-Interim Orders: The Third Term You Need to Know
There is a third term that arises in practice that most people, and most general legal articles, do not explain: the ad-interim order.
An ad-interim order is a specific type of interim order passed ex parte, meaning without hearing the other side, at the first hearing of an application, before notice is issued or served on the opposite party.
When you file an urgent application for an injunction, for example to stop a property being sold tomorrow, the court may pass an ad-interim order on the day of filing, without calling the other side. This is the ad-interim stage.
Once the other side appears and is heard, the court either confirms, modifies, or vacates the ad-interim order. At that point it becomes a regular interim order passed after hearing both sides.
The progression is: ad-interim order (ex parte, first hearing) → interim order (after hearing both sides) → final order on the application → final decree in the suit.
In property disputes, this distinction is practically significant. If your neighbour has sold disputed property to a third party in the time between your filing and the other side being heard, the courts examine whether the third party had notice of the ad-interim order. This affects whether the transaction can be set aside.
Legal Framework: CPC Provisions
The Code of Civil Procedure 1908 does not use the word “interim” or “interlocutory” as defined terms in most provisions, but the framework for both flows from several key provisions.
Order 39, Rules 1 and 2: Power of the court to grant a temporary injunction restraining a party from doing something that would cause irreparable injury, waste, damage, or alienation of property. This is the primary source of interim injunction powers in civil suits. You can read more about how to apply for an interim injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC in our detailed guide.
Order 39, Rule 3: Power to grant an injunction before the defendant is heard, that is, the ad-interim stage. The court can act without notice to the other side in cases of extreme urgency, with the case coming up for hearing shortly after.
Order 38, Rule 5: Power to attach property before judgment in a civil suit, where there is reason to believe the defendant will dispose of property to defeat the decree.
Section 94: General power of the court to make interlocutory orders including attaching property, appointing a receiver, and granting interim injunctions, where no other provision specifically applies.
Section 151: Inherent powers of the court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice. Courts rely on this provision to pass interlocutory and interim orders in situations not covered by specific rules.
Order 43, Rule 1: Lists the specific interlocutory orders that are appealable as of right. This list is closed and exhaustive. An interlocutory order that does not fall within Order 43 Rule 1 is generally not directly appealable and must be challenged through revision under Section 115 CPC or through a Letters Patent Appeal in High Court proceedings.
Orders specifically listed as appealable under Order 43 Rule 1 include: orders granting or refusing an application for temporary injunction, orders refusing to grant the attachment before judgment, orders appointing or refusing to appoint a receiver, and orders on the striking out of pleadings among others.
Legal Framework: BNSS and Criminal Proceedings
In criminal proceedings, the distinction between interlocutory and interim orders carries a specific statutory consequence.
Section 438 of the BNSS 2023 (which replaced Section 397 of the CrPC) gives the High Court and Sessions Court the power of revision over orders of inferior criminal courts. However, Section 438(2) of the BNSS specifically bars the exercise of the revisional power in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial, or other proceeding.
This means: if a criminal court passes an order that is purely interlocutory in nature, such as an order on an adjournment application, an order about the manner of taking evidence, or an order on a preliminary procedural question, it cannot be challenged in revision. You have to wait for the final order in the proceedings.
The Supreme Court in Amar Nath v. State of Haryana (1977) 4 SCC 137 explained the rationale for this bar. If every interlocutory order in a criminal case could be challenged immediately by way of revision, it would bring the trial to a standstill. The bar is deliberately wide to prevent dilatory tactics.
However, courts have consistently held that an order which is not purely interlocutory, because it substantially affects the rights of a party or decides a preliminary issue of substance, may still be revisable notwithstanding the bar in Section 438(2) BNSS. The key question is whether the order is “purely interlocutory” or whether it has the character of a final adjudication on a preliminary matter.
In the context of bail proceedings, an interim bail order is an interlocutory order, but it is specifically dealt with under the bail provisions of the BNSS and not through the revision mechanism.
The Three-Pronged Test for Interim Injunctions
For interim injunctions specifically, the Supreme Court in Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh (1992) 1 SCC 719 laid down the three conditions that all must be satisfied before a court grants an interim injunction:
Prima facie case: The applicant must show that there is a serious question to be tried and that on the face of it, they have a case that deserves to go to trial. This is not a final determination on the merits. The court does not decide who is right at this stage. It only decides whether there is a genuine issue to be tried.
Balance of convenience: The court weighs the hardship to the applicant if the injunction is refused against the hardship to the opposite party if it is granted. If refusing the injunction would cause more harm to the applicant than granting it would cause to the other side, the balance tips in favor of granting it.
Irreparable injury: The applicant must show that if the injunction is not granted, they will suffer a loss or injury that cannot be adequately compensated in money. If money can fix the problem, an injunction is generally not the right remedy.
All three conditions must coexist. Satisfying one or two is not enough. In Colgate Palmolive v. Hindustan Lever (1999) 7 SCC 1, the Supreme Court added additional factors including the public interest, the conduct of the parties, and whether the applicant has come to court with clean hands.
What Happens to an Interim Order: Duration and Lapsing
One of the most practically important questions about interim orders is how long they last.
An interim injunction granted by a civil court continues in force until it is vacated, modified, or until the final disposal of the case, unless the order itself specifies a shorter period. An order that says “interim injunction granted till next date” expires on that date if not renewed. An order that says “interim injunction granted till further orders” continues until the court passes a further order vacating or modifying it.
In Arjan Singh v. Punit Ahluwalia (2008) 8 SCC 348, the Supreme Court held that an order that is limited to a particular date does not survive beyond that date. If the matter is not taken up and renewed on that date, the order lapses.
If the case in which the interim order was passed is disposed of finally, the interim order merges into the final decree or is superseded by it. An interim order has no independent life beyond the case in which it was passed.
The 2024 development on automatic vacation of stays:
In Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency v. CBI (2018) 16 SCC 299, the Supreme Court had directed that stays granted by High Courts in criminal cases should automatically expire after six months if not extended. This created a regime where stays would lapse even if the party had not done anything wrong and the case had simply not been listed.
In High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2024 SCC OnLine SC 207, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court overruled this position. The court held that a blanket direction for automatic vacation of interim orders after a fixed period is contrary to the rule of law and judicial principles. Stays do not automatically lapse after six months. Every order has to be dealt with on its own merits. This is current law and it directly affects cases in Lucknow and across UP.
Appealability: Which Orders Can You Immediately Challenge
This is where the interim versus interlocutory distinction has the most direct practical consequence.
In civil cases:
Orders listed under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC are appealable as of right to the appropriate appellate court. The appeal is filed, heard, and decided on its own, separately from the main suit.
Orders not covered by Order 43 Rule 1 are generally not directly appealable. If you want to challenge such an order, your options are revision under Section 115 CPC (limited to jurisdictional errors), or in High Court proceedings, a Letters Patent Appeal if available, or a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution in the High Court.
A purely interlocutory order on a procedural matter is generally not revisable under Section 115 CPC because Section 115 itself requires that the order must have decided the case finally, or must have decided a question that would have the effect of deciding the case finally, or must have otherwise decided incorrectly a question of law.
In criminal cases:
The bar under Section 438(2) BNSS on revision of interlocutory criminal orders means that challenges to such orders must generally wait for the final order in the proceedings, unless the order is shown to be not “purely interlocutory.”
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra (1977) 4 SCC 551 explained that the bar under the criminal revision provision applies only to orders that are purely interlocutory. Orders that finally dispose of a case at an intermediate stage, or that decide substantial questions of rights, are not barred.
In Wander Ltd. v. Antox India 1990 Supp SCC 1, the Supreme Court explained that an appellate court should not ordinarily interfere with an interlocutory order passed by the court below unless the court below applied wrong principles or failed to consider relevant material.
Practical Meaning for Litigants in Lucknow
If you are involved in a property dispute, a family matter, a recovery suit, or a criminal case in Lucknow, here is what this distinction means for you in plain terms.
If the court passes an order in your favor: Check whether it is an ad-interim or an interim order. If it is ad-interim (passed without the other side being heard), it will come up for hearing again when the other side appears. Be prepared to argue for it to be confirmed. If it is interim (passed after both sides were heard), it continues until further orders or final disposal.
If the court passes an order against you: Check whether the order falls within Order 43 Rule 1 CPC. If it does, you can appeal it immediately. If it does not, assess whether it is purely interlocutory (in which case a challenge may not be available immediately) or whether it substantially decides a right (in which case revision or a writ petition may be available). Getting legal advice on which remedy applies before you decide to challenge is important.
If an order in your favor lapses: This happens when an order was granted “till next date” and you did not appear on that date or the matter was not listed. The order does not continue automatically. You need to apply for its renewal. A property dispute lawyer in Lucknow tracks these dates to ensure interim protection continues without gaps.
If an order in your favor is violated: An interim injunction is a court order. Violation of a court order is contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. You can file a contempt application. In the context of a domestic violence protection order, violation is also a criminal offence under Section 31 of the PWDVA. Read more about what DV lawyer in Lucknow can do when a protection order is violated.
In a matrimonial case: An interim maintenance order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is an interlocutory order in the divorce proceedings. It is enforceable like any other court order. If it is not paid, you can file an execution application before the family court. Read more in our guide to family lawyer in Lucknow.
Difference Between Interim Order and Interlocutory Order: Summary Table
| Point | Interlocutory Order | Interim Order |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Any order passed during pendency of a case before final judgment | Temporary relief granted for a specific period or pending further orders |
| Scope | Broader — includes all non-final orders | Narrower — only orders granting temporary relief |
| Relationship | Parent category | A subset of interlocutory orders |
| Examples | Order on amendment, order on jurisdiction, order on discovery, order on framing of issues | Interim injunction, interim stay, interim maintenance, interim custody, interim protection order |
| Appealability | Only if listed in Order 43 Rule 1 CPC (civil) or if not purely interlocutory (criminal) | Same test — but orders granting or refusing temporary injunctions are specifically listed in Order 43 |
| Duration | Subsists until vacated, modified, or case is disposed | Subsists until the specified date, further orders, or final disposal |
| Ex parte version | Generally not passed ex parte | Can be passed ex parte at the ad-interim stage (Order 39 Rule 3 CPC) |
| Revision (criminal) | Barred if purely interlocutory under Section 438(2) BNSS | Same bar applies — but courts look at substance over label |
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I appeal an interim order immediately? It depends on what the order covers. Order 43 Rule 1 of the CPC lists the specific orders that are directly appealable. An order granting or refusing a temporary injunction is in that list and can be appealed. An order that is not in that list generally cannot be appealed immediately and must be challenged through revision or a writ petition if at all.
What is the difference between an interim order and a status quo order? A status quo order is a specific type of interim order directing that things remain as they are between the parties at the time the order is passed. It is narrower than a full injunction because it does not direct anyone to do or undo something — it simply preserves the position. Courts pass status quo orders when they want to prevent any change without necessarily deciding who is right at the interim stage.
Can an interlocutory order in a criminal case be challenged by revision? Only if it is not purely interlocutory. Section 438(2) of the BNSS bars revision of purely interlocutory orders in criminal proceedings. If the order substantially affects a party’s rights or finally decides a preliminary issue, courts have allowed revision notwithstanding this bar.
Does an interim order continue after the case is decided? No. An interim order passed during the pendency of a case is superseded by the final decree. Once the case is decided, the interim order ceases to have effect and the parties are governed by the final judgment.
What happens if the other party violates an interim injunction? Violation of a court-passed interim injunction is contempt of court. You can file a contempt application before the court that passed the order. The court can impose a fine and in serious cases imprisonment. If the order is also a protection order under the PWDVA, violation is separately a criminal offence.
Can an interim order be passed in criminal proceedings? Yes. Bail orders including interim bail, stay of prosecution, and ad-interim stays in criminal appeals and revisions are forms of interim orders in criminal proceedings. They are governed by the specific provisions of the BNSS dealing with those matters rather than Order 39 CPC.
Is a stay order the same as an interim injunction? Not exactly. A stay order typically refers to stopping the operation of another court’s order or decree, for example staying a decree while an appeal is pending. An interim injunction restrains a party from doing something. Both are interim orders but they operate differently.
What does “till further orders” mean in an interim order? It means the order continues without a fixed end date until the court passes a further order modifying or vacating it. The party who wants it vacated must apply to the court to have it discharged. The party who holds the order must keep renewing it on successive dates in some courts, while in others it continues automatically until further orders are passed.
A Note on Getting Legal Advice
If you are involved in a case where an interim or interlocutory order has been passed, or where you need one, the specific facts of your case determine what remedies are available, how to apply, and what arguments are likely to succeed.
At Royal Litigators, we handle civil and criminal matters including applications for interim relief, challenges to interlocutory orders, and contempt proceedings for violation of court orders.
Contact us if you have a question about an order in your case.
Related Reading:
- What Is an Application for Interim Injunction Under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC?
- Property Dispute Lawyer in Lucknow: Resolving Land and Property Conflicts in UP
- DV Lawyer in Lucknow: Legal Protection Under the Domestic Violence Act
- Family Lawyer in Lucknow: Complete Legal Guide for Every Family Matter
- Real Estate Lawyers in Lucknow: Complete Guidance to Property Related Matters
- Top Criminal Lawyer in Lucknow
This article is for general information only. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. The law may have changed after this article was published. Please consult a qualified advocate before taking any legal step in your matter.