Background:An IgE-mediated inflammation of the membranes lining the nose causes allergic rhinitis, a symptomatic condition of the nose that develops following exposure to allergens. The present study was conducted to compare olopatadine hydrochloride and rupatadine fumarate in seasonal allergic rhinitis. Materials & Methods: 80 patients of allergic rhinitis were divided into 2 groups of 40 each. Group I patients received olopatadine 10 mg once daily orally for two weeks and group II patients received rupatadine 10 mg once daily orally for two weeks. Assessment of serum Immunoglobulin E (IgE) level, total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scoring was done. Results: Group I had 22 males and 18 females and group II had 17 males and 23 females. The mean duration of suffering was 15.2months in group I and 13.7 in group II. Total leucocyte count was 9484.2 in group I and 8642.4 in group II. DC Neutrophil 63.6% in group I and 64.3% in group II. DC Eosinophil was 7.6% in group I and 7.5% in group II. Absolute eosinophil count was 701.2cells per microlitre in group I and 698.3cells per microlitre in group II and IgElevel was 342.1IU/ml in group I and 325.9IU/ml in group II. The mean total nasal symptom score (TNSS) was 16.8 in group I and 14.3 in group II. The mean rhinoconjunctivitisquality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) was 3.8 in group I and 3.2 in group II. The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Because of its superior efficacy and safety profile, lopatadine is a preferable option for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis when compared to rupatadine.