@shrikanth_krish I've 3 possibilities for this inference. 1. What you say may be true. 2. The inscription or its transcription indicates several Tamilisms or prAkR^itisms. e.g. the pavIriya & pravachana are not real kalpasUtra-s. I believe they are both corruptions of bahvR^icha -- RVs. There are

@shrikanth_krish 18 redundant names with kanda in them. Of those:
uruttirakanda (rudraskanda), kandakumara (skandakumAra), kandama (skandamaha),
bhavaskanda, vinnakanda (viShNuskanda), akkanda (agniskanda), kandana (skandana),
kandapUdi (skandabhUti), virakandan (vIraskanda) are all kaumAra names

@shrikanth_krish attested elsewhere. Hence kandADai could also be one such by principle of regular sound change: perhaps skandATTa. Thus the vaiShNava kandADai is a later 1. 3. Given that they are vAdhUla-s they were probably the same as the vaiShNava kandADai-s. However, they @RangaTheDude

@shrikanth_krish @RangaTheDude reworked the etymology of the clan from a kaumAra interpretation of gandhADai after their conversion to the vaiShaNava-mata.