A.M.Shaffique, J.

1. The petitioner is a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. They have approached this Court inter alia contending that though the secured asset was taken possession pursuant to the direction issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri and possession was taken delivery by the Advocate Commissioner on 18.4.2017 and the possession was handed over to the petitioner, subsequently, the respondents 4 and 5 had trespassed into the property. Petitioner therefor preferred Ext P3 complaint to the Police to restore possession of the secured asset. But no action has been taken in the matter so far. Hence the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

2. The fifth respondent appeared through counsel. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that the fifth respondent was the owner of the property. In order to arrange certain loan, he had executed a sale deed in favour of the fourth respondent, who had taken loan from the petitioner, Finance Company. The contention urged is that the sale deed was not to be acted upon and it was only executed by way of security for the loan and that it was a sham document.

3. Further it i