Kudiwave Cries Foul Over ₦750m PalmPay Transfer, Demands Refund

A dispute involving ₦750,369,439.04 belonging to Kudiwave Technologies Limited has intensified, with the company demanding the immediate return of funds it alleges were transferred from its PalmPay settlement account while a court ruling on the matter was still pending.

Kudiwave staged a protest at PalmPay’s office on Opebi Road, Ikeja, Lagos, demanding clarification on the whereabouts of the money and calling for a police investigation into the circumstances surrounding the transaction.

The company alleged that the funds were debited from its PalmPay account, number 8889232516, on July 15, 2026, with the narration “Judicial Adjustment”, seven days before the Federal High Court in Lagos set aside the order under which the transfer was made.

The development has raised questions over the circumstances surrounding the transaction, the destination of the funds and who is responsible for returning the money following the court’s decision.

Court documents supplied by Kudiwave showed that the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU) obtained an order from the Federal High Court, Lagos, on June 29, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/795/2026, involving the Inspector-General of Police, PalmPay Limited and Kudiwave Technologies Limited.

Under the order, PalmPay was directed to disclose the balance in Kudiwave’s account and “forthwith recover, reverse, and/or transfer” funds standing to the credit of the account to the Nigeria Police Force Microfinance Bank – Special Fraud Unit Account No. 0020269175, identified as the designated Police Exhibit Account.

The court also ordered PalmPay to place the account under strict restriction and cooperate with the police in identifying and tracing its operators.

Justice Ibrahim Ahmad Kala made the order after hearing the police and PalmPay’s counsel. The court record further stated that there was no appearance for Kudiwave despite service of the application and hearing notice at its registered address.

Kudiwave subsequently challenged the order, saying it became aware of the ruling on July 2 and approached the same court seeking, among other reliefs, an order setting it aside and staying its execution.

The company said its application was argued on July 13, after which the court adjourned the matter for ruling.

Against this backdrop, Kudiwave said it was surprised when the entire balance of ₦750,369,439.04 was transferred from its account on July 15, while its application challenging the order was awaiting determination.

Speaking during the protest, Kudiwave’s Company Secretary, Prince Oko Kalu, said the company was seeking answers on who authorised the transfer, where the money was sent and why it had not been returned after the order was subsequently set aside.

According to the company, its transaction statement showed that the debit occurred at 3:38:31am on July 15, with the narration: “Judicial Adjustment – Cash_Access Bank_0552 BUSINESS_ACCOUNT.”

Kalu alleged that the money was not transferred into the Police Microfinance Bank account specifically identified in the June 29 court order.

Kudiwave’s solicitors, Onwumere & Co, also raised the issue in a July 29 letter to PalmPay, demanding disclosure of the beneficiary’s name, account number, BVN and the mandate or authority relied upon for the transaction.

The lawyers demanded an immediate reversal of the ₦750,369,439.04 and sought interest at 21 per cent per annum from July 15 until full repayment.

PalmPay, however, rejected the allegation that the transfer was unlawful.

In a response signed by its Legal Counsel, Caleb Aluya, the payment company said the transfer was carried out solely in compliance with the Federal High Court’s June 29 order, which it maintained remained valid, binding and enforceable as of July 15.

PalmPay also disputed Kudiwave’s reliance on an earlier communication in which the company had indicated that it considered it appropriate to await the determination of the pending application before taking further action.

According to PalmPay, the earlier communication was intended to mitigate the consequences of non-compliance with the court order and give Kudiwave an opportunity to obtain a valid order staying or varying the substantive order. It stressed that the communication was not an admission that its obligation to comply with the existing court order had been suspended.

The company further maintained that Kudiwave was covered by an earlier ex-parte order in which PalmPay was expressly listed as a respondent.

“PalmPay therefore acted strictly in compliance with the express terms of the Court’s Order and not on its own initiative,” the company said.

PalmPay added that it had consistently complied with valid court orders served on it and would continue to do so.

The company said that following the ruling delivered on July 22, it formally engaged the Nigeria Police Force and requested compliance with the court’s decision.

PalmPay maintained that because the funds had been transferred to the designated Police Recovery Account pursuant to the June 29 order, any further action required to implement the July 22 ruling should be directed to the police, whom it described as the current custodian of the funds.

Meanwhile, documents supplied by Kudiwave showed that the Federal High Court, on July 22, set aside, vacated and discharged the June 29 order.

The ruling also directed the removal of restrictions placed on Kudiwave’s account number 8889232516.

PalmPay subsequently acknowledged the court’s decision in a July 22 letter to Kudiwave’s solicitors, confirming that the restriction on the account had been lifted.

However, Kudiwave said it had not regained access to the ₦750.36 million transferred seven days earlier, making the recovery of the funds the central issue in the ongoing dispute.

While Kudiwave maintains that the money should be returned following the setting aside of the order, PalmPay insists that it had already complied with a valid court directive and that the funds were subsequently in police custody.

The dispute has also extended to a separate fundamental rights action filed by Kudiwave.

In documents supporting the action, the company accused some officers of the Police Special Fraud Unit of demanding ₦50 million in alleged bribes, threatening its representatives and attempting to transfer its funds to the Police Exhibit Account. The allegations were contained in an affidavit sworn to by Kalu.

Kudiwave further alleged that restrictions placed on its account since April had severely disrupted its operations, leaving it unable to meet contractual obligations, pay salaries, settle statutory obligations and conduct its daily business activities.

The company is seeking declarations that the alleged freezing of its account, attempts to transfer its funds and alleged demands for money violated its constitutional rights.

It is also seeking ₦500 million in general, exemplary and aggravated damages, as well as orders restraining the police from further interfering with its account and business operations.

During the protest, Kudiwave stressed that the dispute extends beyond the company because its settlement account is used to process funds belonging to customers.

Kalu said traders, freelancers, students, small business owners and other customers had been affected by the restrictions placed on the account.

He maintained that the company was not seeking special treatment but wanted the law to be applied fairly to all parties involved.