Aim The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline given as buccal and lingual infiltration in adult patients undergoing erupted mandibular first and second molar teeth extraction versus inferior alveolar nerve block technique using 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline. Materials and methods A total of 100 patients undergoing extraction of mandibular posterior teeth were divided into two equally matched groups for the study, out of which 50 patients were given 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline as buccal and lingual infiltration and 50 patients were given 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline using classic direct inferior alveolar nerve block with lingual and buccal nerve block. Efficacy of anesthesia was determined using a numeric analog scale (NAS) ranging from 0 indicating no pain to 10 indicating the worst pain imaginable. The NAS was taken by a different operator to avoid bias. Results The pain scores in both groups were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test, and a p value of 0.338 was obtained which is not statistically significant. Hence, no significant difference in the pain score was established between both groups. The adverse effects of both the local anesthetics if any were noted. Conclusion From this study, we concluded that the use of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline is as effective as inferior alveolar nerve block with lignocaine but without the risk of attendant adverse effects of inferior alveolar nerve block technique.