KudiWave Technologies Limited has publicly challenged a ₦750.37 million debit from its account with Palmpay Limited, questioning the destination of the funds and the court order that was cited for the transaction. The company released a press statement detailing the sequence of events and its demands for transparency from the fintech platform.
Transaction Details and Court Order
The transaction, valued at ₦750,369,439.04, appeared on KudiWave's account on July 15, 2026, with the description “Judicial Adjustment.” KudiWave said the debit was executed without its authorization or prior notification, raising immediate red flags about the legitimacy of the process.
According to KudiWave, Palmpay attributed the transaction to an order of the Federal High Court in Lagos made on June 29, 2026, in proceedings involving the Inspector-General of Police. However, the company said that same order was subsequently set aside, vacated, and discharged by the court on July 22 after KudiWave challenged the circumstances under which it was obtained.
Background: Police Investigation and Ex-Parte Order
The dispute originated from an investigation by the Police Special Fraud Unit, Ikoyi, which had earlier secured an ex-parte order placing a 90-day Post-No-Debit restriction on accounts belonging to several parties, including KudiWave. KudiWave said it later became aware of separate proceedings in which the police sought an order relating to funds standing to its credit with Palmpay.
The application came before Justice Ibrahim Ahmad Kala of the Federal High Court on June 29, with the court granting the relief sought by the police. KudiWave subsequently filed an application on July 3 seeking to set aside the order and stay its execution, arguing that it had not been properly served with the processes that led to the June 29 decision.
Legal Challenge and Court Ruling
According to the company, Palmpay and the police were served with the application before it was heard on July 13. KudiWave said the matter was adjourned for ruling after the hearing, but two days later, on July 15, the ₦750.37 million transaction was processed on its account.
The Federal High Court subsequently ruled in KudiWave’s favour on July 22, setting aside the June 29 order and directing that restrictions placed on the company’s account be removed. In arriving at the decision, the court examined the circumstances surrounding the service of the earlier processes on KudiWave.
The company said the court questioned whether the manner in which the processes were purportedly delivered was sufficient to bring the proceedings to its attention and found merit in its application to have the earlier order vacated. While the July 22 ruling did not prevent the police from pursuing criminal proceedings where there was evidence of an offence, it removed the June 29 order that had formed the basis of the dispute over KudiWave’s account.
Fund Movements and Beneficiary Discrepancy
KudiWave is now questioning whether the July 15 transfer was executed strictly in accordance with the terms of the earlier order. Records of activity on the account have raised questions about movements involving the funds during the restriction period. KudiWave said Palmpay transferred the money on July 11 and returned it to the account later that same day, before another transfer was made on July 15. The company noted that these movements took place while the account was frozen and said it only became aware of the transactions after the account was reopened.
The company said the June 29 order provided for the transfer of identified funds to a Police Recovery Account or an account associated with the Police Special Fraud Unit. It alleged that records available to it instead indicate that the ₦750.37 million was transferred to an Access Bank business account. KudiWave said the discrepancy has made the identity of the beneficiary and the authority for the transfer central to the dispute.
Demands and Allegations
KudiWave is asking Palmpay to disclose the account that received the funds, the identity of the beneficiary, the instruction authorising the transaction, and the specific provision of the court order relied upon. The company is also seeking an explanation of when Palmpay received the relevant court process and why the transfer was completed after the financial institution had, according to KudiWave, been notified of the pending application challenging the June 29 order.
KudiWave maintained that its concern was not with the obligation of financial institutions to comply with valid court orders, but whether the transaction carried out on its account corresponded with the specific terms of the order relied upon. The company also alleged that, while attempting to resolve the initial restriction placed on its account, its Company Secretary, Barrister Prince Oko, met officers of the Police Special Fraud Unit and that a ₦50 million payment was demanded to facilitate removal of the restriction. KudiWave said it rejected the alleged demand; the allegation has not been determined by a court.
Next Steps and PalmPay's Response
The company said it is considering further legal and regulatory action over the transaction and is seeking the recovery of the funds as well as a full reconciliation of how the ₦750.37 million moved from its account. The dispute could also draw attention to compliance procedures used by financial institutions when executing court orders affecting customer funds, particularly where the underlying order is being challenged before the courts.
Responding to the allegations, PalmPay categorically rejected claims that it unlawfully debited KudiWave’s account, maintaining that the transaction complained of was carried out pursuant to a valid order of the Federal High Court. However, KudiWave insists that PalmPay must provide a clear account of the transaction, including why the destination reflected in its records allegedly differs from the account contemplated in the court proceedings.
