Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9920 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 705 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Verma And Another Respondent :- Ankit Kumar And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Gopal Tripathi,Shivam Kumar Mishra with Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5036 of 2023 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Respondent :- District Judge Gonda And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sulabh Kr. Srivastava,Madan Gopal Tripathi Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ajeet Kumar, who appears in person as respondent no. 3 and perused the record. 2. This petition i.e. Matter Under Article 227 No. 705 of 2025 was said to be connected with the similar issue raised in Matter Under Article 227 No. 5036 of 2023, as such, the said case was also summoned and both the petitions are being disposed of by means of this common order. 3. The facts as emerge are against the petitioners, a decree came to be passed for eviction, the said decree was challenged in first appeal, which was dismissed and the second appeal, which too was dismissed as well as the SLP, which too was dismissed. As the execution has been filed in the year 2007 and the appellate proceedings were pending, the decree holder did not attend the execution proceedings, as such, execution application was dismissed by means of an order dated 02.08.2008. Subsequently, after the culmination of the proceedings upto Supreme Court, an application was filed seeking recall of the order dismissing the execution application dismissed in the year 2008, the said application was filed on 09.09.2019 along with the delay condonation application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the said application, objections were filed by the petitioner that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be made applicable to any application filed under Order 21 in view of there being a specific bar, as such, the application was to be rejected. The Executing Court did not agree with the petitioner and allowed the application and permitted the execution by means of an order dated 20.01.2023. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing a civil revision no. 29 of 2023, which too was dismissed mainly on the ground that the application can be filed under Section 151 CPC. Challenging the said order, petition no. 5036 of 2023 was filed, which is pending and is being decided herein. 4. Once again although the petitioner did not have the stay order from this Court in petition no. 5036 of 2023, he objected and delayed the execution and requested for adjournment, which was rejected by the Executing Court by means of an order dated 21.01.2025. Challenging the same, petition no. 705 of 2025 has been filed. 5. The neat submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that once section 5 cannot be applied to the execution proceedings, the application for recall had to be rejected in view of 30 days limitation prescribed under Order 21 Rule 105(2) CPC. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Damodaran Pillai and others Versus South Indian Bank Limited (2005 ALL.C.J. 2053). Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Ganesh Prasad Versus Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow (2011 (29) LCD 2541) to argue that when a manner of doing a thing is prescribed it should be done in that manner alone and not in any other manner. With regard to power under Article 227 reliance is placed upon the judgment in the case of Bhudev Mallick Alias Bhudeb Mallick Versus Ranajit Ghoshal and others, 2025 INSC 175 to argue that the order impugned can be corrected in exercise of powers under Article 227. 6. The counsel for the respondent on the other hand relies upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Arjun Prasad Versus Smt. Ameer Jahan Begum, ILR 2007 page 831, wherein specific issue was considered and held that restoration of such a case would lie under Section 151. 7. Considering and following the judgment in the case of Arjun Prasad (Supra), I do not find any error in the finding recorded by both the Courts below, thus the both the petitions are dismissed. The Executing Court is directed to execute the decree within a period of four months from today and submit a report to this Court through the Senior Registrar of this Court. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Arun Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench