Rise of new landholders under Nayaka administration was a prominent feature of Nayaka rule. The first thing that is noticed is a multiplicity of the landholding class in terms of the different communities they belong to. The proliferation of communities of landholders must have occurred through purchase; lease and the violent confiscation of lands by people who increased their power over the local community, or who migrated to the region following the invasions by Vijayanagar armies during the fifteenth century.
Historical evidences in the form of inscriptions have shown that a Setti obtained the Kani right to a village through a lease, and the Gavundas, Reddis, Kaikkolas and Manradis also became landlords in one way or another. There are names of Mudaliyar, Pillai and Reddiyar among local leaders who assembled and granted tax remission to the Kanmala community, and it seems that they were the leaders of Nattavar, though there is some ambiguity on this point. Though the Nattavar or Nattar of this period were not always the leading landholders of a certain territory, there seems to be little doubt that they had certain rights to the land through the offices they held in the local administration. They obtained an allotted portion of income from the land, even if they were not landholders in the proper sense of the term.
In contrast to the abundance of information on the rise of new landholders, not much is known about the situation of those who compose the lower stratum of society. There is not enough information on them. There are instances of cultivators being brought to land, (Kudiyum Erri) in many inscriptions recording the donation or lease of land which often comprised newly-reclaimed plots.
Another notable point is the growth in importance, or elevation in status, of certain leading individuals. There is an example of an individual who grew to be a local leader, increasing his economic and political power, in Kandiyadevar, who was granted the title of Yadavaraya by the Mudalis of a larger territory. The mention of the names of certain Reddis, Pillais and others individually in the assembly of the local people shows the breaking up of the local homogeneous organizations of the middle Chola period, such as Nadu, in which no importance was given to members as individuals. There are examples of the growth in importance of individuals even at the village level. The records of land sales by the Uravar, describes them as `the villagers Sellanga Virappa Gavundan and others` (uravar sellanga virappa gavundan ullittar). Another example is seen in an inscription from North Arcot which records the agreement between the people of a village and the temple in a neighbouring village on the digging of a water channel. The matter was settled in the presence of the agent of a Nayaka (Achchutappa), and the village representatives were an Uravar, a Padikaval, an Urkanakku and a Tattar. After each of these status terms, one personal name was given. Judging from the context, the person appearing after the term Uravar may be regarded as the village headman. The Gavunda title held in the previous inscription indicates the status of the headman in some localities.
Thus, it can be seen from the ongoing discussion that there was a definite change in the pattern of landholding and the emergence of a new systems of land holders under Nayaka administration.
