Archive · 8 Oct 2026
Madras High Court Hears Vijay’s ₹30 Crore Assets Case
A voter has asked the Madras High Court to review Joseph Vijay’s election win in Perambur.
The voter says Vijay’s election papers left out about ₹30 crore in assets.
Vijay wants the court to dismiss the case.
His side says the petition does not give enough details and does not show that the alleged omission changed the result.
The judge asked whether leaving out that amount could count as corrupt practice.
The judge also noted that Vijay had declared assets worth more than ₹600 crore.
The court questioned whether the missing information would have changed a voter’s choice.
The report describes the judge’s questions during a hearing, not a final decision on the petition.
Voter S Dinesh filed an election petition challenging Joseph Vijay’s victory from Perambur in the April 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly polls.
The petition alleges discrepancies in Vijay’s financial disclosures, including assets worth around ₹30 crore that were not declared.
Vijay asked the Madras High Court to reject the petition, arguing it lacked material particulars and did not establish the petitioner’s voter status.
Vijay’s application also says minor affidavit discrepancies are not enough to overturn an election without showing how they affected the result.
Justice V Lakshminarayanan questioned whether the alleged omission could amount to corrupt practice or influence voters, given Vijay declared assets worth more than ₹600 crore.
- Who
- Chief Minister Joseph Vijay, voter S Dinesh, and Justice V Lakshminarayanan.
- What
- The Madras High Court heard Vijay’s request to reject an election petition alleging about ₹30 crore in assets were omitted from his election disclosures.
- When
- Wednesday, October 7; the article says the challenged election was held in April 2026.
- Where
- Madras High Court; the petition concerns Vijay’s victory from Perambur Assembly constituency.
- Why
- Dinesh alleges discrepancies in Vijay’s financial disclosures; Vijay seeks dismissal of the petition, arguing it lacks material particulars.
Petitioner’s allegations
Vijay’s response and court’s questions
Financial disclosures
Petitioner’s allegations
Dinesh alleges discrepancies in Vijay’s election affidavit, including the omission of assets worth around ₹30 crore.
Vijay’s response and court’s questions
Vijay’s application says the petition lacks material particulars; the judge questioned whether the alleged omission could amount to corrupt practice, noting the declared assets exceeded ₹600 crore.
Basis for challenging the result
Petitioner’s allegations
Dinesh has brought an election petition challenging Vijay’s Perambur victory.
Vijay’s response and court’s questions
Vijay argues that minor discrepancies alone do not justify setting aside an election without particulars showing an effect on the result, and questions whether the petition establishes Dinesh’s voter status.
- Alleged undisclosed assets
- Around ₹30 crore
- Assets declared
- More than ₹600 crore
- Constituency
- Perambur Assembly constituency
- Election
- Tamil Nadu Assembly polls in April 2026
- Petitioner
- Voter S Dinesh
- Judge
- Justice V Lakshminarayanan
- Hearing issue
- Whether the alleged non-disclosure could amount to corrupt practice or affect the election