.
KudiWave Technologies Limited has challenged the transfer of ₦750.37 million from its account with PalmPay Limited, questioning the legal basis for the transaction and the account to which the funds were ultimately sent.
The technology company said the debit was recorded on July 15, 2026, under the narration “Judicial Adjustment”, and was carried out without its authorisation or prior notification.
KudiWave said PalmPay relied on a Federal High Court order issued in Lagos on June 29, 2026, to execute the transaction. However, the company subsequently challenged the order, which was set aside, vacated and discharged by the same court on July 22, 2026.
Disputed Transfer Comes Amid Court Challenge
According to KudiWave, it filed a motion on July 3 seeking to overturn the June 29 order and stay its execution.
The company said the application was served on PalmPay and the Police before the matter was heard by the court on July 13.
Two days later, on July 15, the disputed ₦750.37 million was transferred from KudiWave’s account.
KudiWave also alleged that PalmPay had moved the funds on July 11 and returned them to the account the same day before transferring the money again on July 15.
The company said the movements occurred while restrictions had been placed on its account and that it only became aware of the transactions after the account was subsequently reopened.
KudiWave has questioned why the funds were transferred while its application challenging the underlying court order was still awaiting determination.
Court Later Sets Aside June 29 Order
The Federal High Court, presided over by Justice Ibrahim Ahmad Kala, ruled on KudiWave’s application on July 22.
The court set aside, vacated and discharged the June 29 order and directed that restrictions placed on KudiWave’s account be removed.
The ruling considered KudiWave’s complaint concerning the manner in which the processes leading to the June 29 order had been served.
However, the court’s decision did not prevent law enforcement authorities from pursuing criminal proceedings where evidence of wrongdoing exists.
KudiWave Questions Where Money Was Sent
A major part of the dispute now centres on the destination of the ₦750.37 million.
KudiWave said the June 29 court order contemplated transferring the identified funds into a Police Recovery Account or Police Special Fraud Unit exhibit account.
The company, however, alleges that its transaction records show the money was instead transferred to an Access Bank business account.
KudiWave is consequently asking PalmPay to disclose the identity of the beneficiary, the instruction that authorised the transaction and the specific court order relied upon to process the debit.
It is also seeking clarification on why the destination allegedly differed from the account contemplated in the court proceedings.
Company Seeks Clarification From PalmPay
KudiWave has further asked PalmPay to explain when it received the relevant court processes and whether the fintech considered its pending application challenging the June 29 order before executing the transfer.
The company stressed that its complaint is not about whether financial institutions should comply with valid court orders.
Instead, it is questioning whether PalmPay acted strictly within the scope of the order it relied upon and whether that order expressly authorised the transfer to the beneficiary account reflected in its records.
KudiWave said it is considering additional legal and regulatory action to recover the ₦750,369,439.04 and establish responsibility for the transaction.
Dispute Traces Back to Police Investigation
The wider dispute began after the Inspector-General of Police, through the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU), Ikoyi, obtained an ex-parte order in Motion No. FHC/L/MISC/470/2026 directing financial institutions to impose a 90-day Post-No-Debit restriction on accounts belonging to listed parties, including KudiWave.
The restriction was subsequently placed on KudiWave’s PalmPay account.
KudiWave said it later learned that the restriction was connected to a PSFU investigation after seeking information about the action taken against its account.
The company further alleged that, during attempts to resolve the restriction, its Company Secretary, Barrister Prince Oko, met officers involved in the investigation and was allegedly asked to pay ₦50 million to facilitate the removal of the restriction.
KudiWave said it rejected the alleged demand. The allegation has not been determined by a court.
Regulatory and Legal Questions Remain
Further proceedings were initiated under Motion No. FHC/L/CS/795/2026, seeking orders concerning funds held in KudiWave’s account.
The Federal High Court granted the application on June 29, but KudiWave challenged the decision, arguing that it had not been properly served with the processes that led to the order.
The court subsequently granted KudiWave’s application on July 22, setting aside the June 29 order and directing the removal of restrictions on the company’s account.
The central issue now is whether the ₦750.37 million transfer, which occurred before the July 22 ruling, complied with the precise terms of the June 29 order and whether the funds were sent to the destination authorised by the court.
The dispute places the spotlight on the obligations of financial institutions when handling funds subject to court orders, while leaving questions over the disputed transaction and the destination of the money to be resolved through the ongoing legal and regulatory processes.
