The family are
Moopil Nairs and claim to be descendants of Karakalamma, a child of
Vararuchi, a
Brahmin saint, and a
Pulayar woman. Through this association, they also share kinship with the
Kadambur Brahmins and the two communities recognise their shared ancient heritage in occasional rituals. The Kavalapparas also claim to have been independent chieftains from the later stages of the
Chera dynasty until the arrival of the
Zamorin of Calicut in 1748, although this is not historically accurate.
K. K. N. Kurup, a historian of the
Malabar region, notes that absence of their name from highly detailed documents of the period indicates that they were no more than "dependent landed aristocracy", variously of the rajas of
Palghat and of
Cochin. They were
naduvazhi of the raja of Palghat, meaning that they were a form of
feudatory governor who inherited their role, which included some political powers, but were subservient to him. During the period when clashes between the Zamorin of Calicut and the king of Cochin were common, which coincided with the arrival of Europeans in the area, the Kavalapparas were able to exploit the uncertainty and unrest to their advantage. They successfully fought in an alliance with forces from the
kingdom of Travancore against the Zamorin and by around 1760 they had reached a deal with the kingdom whereby they gained independence from interference in return for ceding to it a monopoly of the
pepper growing on family properties. Unhampered by the objections previously raised by the Zamorin and by the raja of Cochin, they constructed a
kottaram as a physical symbol of their independence. This residence took a form common to the royal family of Travancore and thus different from the
kovilakam palaces that traditionally belied the status of Malabar rulers. Thereafter, the Kavalapparas and the royal house of Travancore retained close ties and it was to Travancore that the family fled when the
Mysorean occupation of Malabar dispossessed them of their properties. The Kavalappara joined with
Kesava Pillai and forces of the
East India Company (EIC) in the
Third Anglo-Mysore War, supplying both soldiers and grain. In recognition of this, Pillai, who was
Diwan of Travancore and acting for the
Bombay Presidency, reinstated their position as chieftains. A dispute arose because this arrangement contradicted one made around the same time between the king of Cochin and the
Madras Presidency, which allowed for the king to have control of the Kavalappara territories. In 1792, the Kavalappara chieftain — who was seeking reinstatement in Kavalappara itself and in Edatara,
Kongad and
Mannur — was given a one-year reinstatement in a subordinate role by a Joint Commission instituted by the EIC in the Bombay Presidency. This was challenged by the king of Cochin, who said that the Kavalappars were his "acknowledged dependent[s]" and paid
tribute to him, but the arrangement was continued with some financial amendments in 1793. The traditional system of land
tenancies and land ownership in Malabar, known as
janmi, had resulted in a small number of families owning most of the land. The EIC had determined to use a slightly modified form of the existing
janmi administrative processes to collect revenue. Under this modified system, the
janmis were granted leases on land and were responsible for collecting revenue — almost entirely based on a proportion of agricultural produce — on behalf of the EIC. The
janmis, such as the Kavalapparas, sublet to tenants known as
kanakkarans, who had some
security of tenure, and both could sublet to
verumpattakkars, who were
tenants-at-will. Thus, in 1794, the EIC granted the Kavalappara family a quinquennial lease on lands but it also disbarred from the feudal privileges of collecting death taxes from the
Mappilas and some festival offerings from the
ryots. All revenue collecting responsibilities were lost in 1796 when they were transferred to direct control of the EIC, although the EIC did return a portion of the funds collected by the system of
malikhana that recognised the loyalty of certain ruling families. In common with many of his peers, the Kavalappara chieftain had amassed considerable arrears in revenue monies that he was supposed to hand over and as a result of the transfer of revenue collection he now became nothing more than a landed aristocrat without political influence. Some feudal rights were retained, notably of control over some temples, but by the end of the nineteenth century the family estates were being administered by the
Court of Wards and remained so until 1910. == Today ==