PalmPay has denied unlawful ₦750m debit from Kudiwave, citing federal high court order.
NewsOnline Nigeria reports that PalmPay Limited has denied allegations that it unlawfully debited ₦750,369,439.04 from an account belonging to Kudiwave Technologies Limited, insisting that the transaction was executed in compliance with a valid Federal High Court order.
Kudiwave, through its solicitors, Tony Eseigbe & Co., had accused PalmPay of transferring the money from its account on July 15, 2026, without authorisation or prior notification.
The transaction reportedly appeared on the account with the narration “Judicial Adjustment.”
Kudiwave’s lawyers said the account had initially been placed under a Post-No-Debit restriction following an order obtained in April 2026 by officers of the Special Fraud Unit in Ikoyi, Lagos.
ALSO: Colonel Ma’aji Reveals Reasons Behind Alleged Coup Plot Against Tinubu
They argued that the Federal High Court subsequently lifted the restriction before the disputed transfer was made.
“Kudiwave Technologies Limited said PalmPay Limited unlawfully debited ₦750,369,439.04 from its account on July 15, 2026, under the narration ‘Judicial Adjustment,’” the company’s statement read.
“Kudiwave stated that it never authorised the transfer and was never notified of it.”
The law firm alleged that the circumstances surrounding the transaction raised questions about possible collusion involving PalmPay, some Special Fraud Unit officers and other financial institutions.
It called for an investigation into how the money was transferred after the court had reportedly invalidated the order underlying the original restriction.
PalmPay confirms lifting account restriction
In a letter dated July 22, 2026, and addressed to Onwumere & Co., Kudiwave’s solicitors, PalmPay confirmed that it had lifted the Post-No-Debit restriction.
The company said it acted following a ruling delivered by Justice Ibrahim Kala of the Federal High Court in Lagos on June 29, 2026.
The proceedings were identified as Suit No. FHC/L/CS/795/2026 between the Inspector General of Police, PalmPay Limited and Kudiwave Technologies Limited.
PalmPay’s legal counsel, Caleb Aluya, stated in the letter that the restriction had been lifted in compliance with the court’s ruling on a motion dated June 15, 2026.
The confirmation followed a demand by Kudiwave’s lawyers, who had accused PalmPay of continuing to restrict access to the account despite the court’s directive.
The lawyers argued that maintaining the restriction would be unlawful, unconstitutional and potentially amount to contempt of court.
They also threatened to commence contempt proceedings and seek damages for losses Kudiwave allegedly suffered from being unable to access the funds.
According to the solicitors, the restriction disrupted Kudiwave’s operations, prevented the company from meeting its financial obligations and exposed it to significant commercial losses.
PalmPay says transfer went to Police Recovery Account
Responding to the allegations, PalmPay maintained that lifting the Post-No-Debit restriction did not invalidate a separate directive requiring the transfer of the identified funds.
In a statement signed by its Head of Marketing and Communications, Olorunfemi Hanson, PalmPay said the July 15 transfer was made pursuant to an order issued by the Federal High Court on June 29, 2026.
According to the fintech company, the order directed it to disclose the balance in Kudiwave’s account and transfer the identified funds to a designated Police Recovery Account.
“The transfer referenced was made on July 15, 2026, in compliance with a subsequent court order of the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/795/2026, made on June 29, 2026, which directed PalmPay to disclose the account balance and transfer the identified funds to a designated Police Recovery Account,” the statement read.
PalmPay said the order remained valid and had not been set aside when the transfer was executed.
“At the time the transfer was effected, the court order remained valid and had not been set aside. PalmPay therefore acted in compliance with a binding directive of the Federal High Court,” the company added.
PalmPay also denied initiating the transaction independently or benefiting from the funds.
“PalmPay did not initiate the transfer independently, nor did the company retain or benefit from the funds,” it stated.
The fintech company said that, as a regulated financial institution, it was legally required to comply with valid orders issued by courts of competent jurisdiction.
It rejected suggestions that it acted unlawfully and reaffirmed its commitment to cooperating with the relevant authorities and parties.
The competing claims have not been independently determined by a court in the reported dispute.
