Where an appeal is made under section 99 of Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, the appellate authority may, in order to prevent the ends of justice being defeated, make such interlocutory orders, including an order of stay pending the decision of the appeal as such authority may deem fit in cooperative society unary note And case in law .Interlocutory orders are also somewhat similar to temporary injunctions. Interlocutory order only settles intervening matter relating to the cause. Such orders are made to secure some end and purpose necessary and essential to the progress of case and generally collateral to the issues to be settled by the court in the final judgment. These orders are also of different natures, such as cooperative society. Interim Sale: Interim sale of any movable property may be ordered, if it is subject to natural decay, such as vegetable etc. Detention Preservation, Inspection, etc of subject matter of suit Interlocutory appeals are typically permitted when the trial judge certifies to the appellate court in an interlocutory order that an important question of law is in doubt and that it will substantially affect the final result of the case. Judicial economy then dictates that the court resolves the issue rather than subject the parties to a trial that may be reversed on an appeal from a final judgment. Courts may also issue interlocutory orders where property is about to be sold or forfeited and a lawsuit has been filed seeking to stop the action. In this type of case, a court will enter an interlocutory Injunction, preventing the transfer of property until it has made a final decision in Interlocutory order for multi state cooperative society. To do otherwise would cause irreparable harm and would complicate legal title to the property if the person contesting the transfer ultimately prevailed an order is not less final because it is subject to appeal or may later be set aside or become otherwise cline deputy commissioner of Taxation (NSW) (1983) 48 ALR 545 at 57 ALJR 673 at 675; 14 ATR 563 at 565; 83 ATC 4532 at 4534. For an example of an unsuccessful attempt to vary final orders on an interlocutory application see Pancetta Nat man [2005] VUSC 132; CC45-2002. See also the preliminary comments in Duding Vatu [2003] VUCA 15; CC 28 of 2003.