Published May 11, 2026 | 1:17 PM ⚊ Updated May 11, 2026 | 1:17 PM
DMK's KR Periakaruppan. Credit: x.com/OfficeOfKRP, Wikimedia Commons
Synopsis: The Madras High Court on Monday reserved its order on a petition filed by DMK leader KR Periakaruppan challenging TVK candidate R Seenivasa Sethupathi’s victory in Tiruppattur by a razor-thin margin of just one vote. The petitioner alleged a postal ballot was dispatched to the wrong constituency. The court heard arguments from both sides before reserving its verdict.
The Madras High Court on Monday, 11 May, reserved its order on a petition filed by DMK leader KR Periakaruppan challenging the wafer-thin victory of TVK candidate R Seenivasa Sethupathi in the Tiruppattur Assembly seat by a margin of just one vote.
According to Bar and Bench, the court was hearing arguments in the matter after previously directing election authorities to file an affidavit explaining why they did not respond to Periakaruppan’s representation regarding the alleged irregularities.
Senior Advocate G Rajagopalan, appearing for the ECI, submitted that the counting process had concluded in the early hours of 5 May and that the petitioner had raised no objections during the counting. Once the results were formally declared, the ECI’s role in the matter came to an end, he argued.
Rajagopalan further contended that no concrete material had been placed on record to substantiate claims that a postal ballot was dispatched to the wrong constituency (despite both constituencies sharing the same name).
He described the allegation as being based on the “imagination of one election agent” and stated that the ECI’s hands were tied post-declaration of results.
Senior Advocate Elango, representing petitioner KR Periakaruppan, informed the court that the Returning Officer had acknowledged the issue in their communication.
The bench, however, pressed for clarity on the core allegation, noting that the entire case hinged on this single vote.
The court observed, “It is their allegation that the mistake is committed by EC. We are only on a primary question, entire case revolves around this one vote. You are not able to say in terms that the wrong constituency has received the ballot paper?”
Rajagopalan replied that the issue was ultimately a matter of evidence to be examined on merits.
After hearing the submissions, the Madras High Court reserved its order in the matter.
