I would say that what can be falsified is rather a hypothesis than an interpretation. Interpretation holds good if it is backed up with enough intersubjective data. It is thus very important to operationalise your problem into a research question.
Dear Faisal Irfan , No one would say that your interpretation of a given literary text is wrong or accurate unless you prove supported by textual evidence what your perspective is like. A poem or a fictional work is liable to read, interpreted, or analyzed in whatever theoretical lens you would like to apply. That, however, does not mean that any reading could pass as acceptable. The criteria is the ability to support your interpretation with textual evidence that would provide for the backing up of your analysis.
A statement can either be true or false. What determines this is the validity of the claims which support a given proposition. The interpretation of any literary work largely depends on the supportive arguments for/against it.
In sciences, including social and human sciences (or humanities, in English), we don't judge. Social and human sciences are conceptual and their goal is to propose conceptualizations able to be validated by a scientific domain. There is no true or false, superior or inferior, even good or bad. Aesthetical, literary or language considerations related to liking or disliking a literary work belong to literary criticism that is similar to musical or theater criticism: they are not a scientific domain convoking scientific questions and methodologies, but rather addressing literary qualities, styles, writing, authors, editions, readings and largely deciding on the public "success" of literary works. In conclusion, social sciences and humanities don't interpret literary texts but explain them.
Literature is viewed within a cultural context, what ideas the author is assessing and how well, the accomplishment of literary assessments through language and character, intellectual parameters and influence. The Iliad remains successful because Homer employed successful narrative devices, expedient ways of writing and consideration of the interaction between characters. This was done within universal understandings of human behaviour and emotions within the context of Iron Age 11 Greece.