This work focuses mainly on the Search and Seizure Action, not as a precautionary measure provided for in the Civil Procedural Code (in articles 839 to 843), but as an action that aims to safeguard the material right of those who have the right of indirect possession over the thing that, due to the fiduciary alienation in the contract, is in the direct possession of others, as is the case with the sale to the consumer by fiduciary alienation. The subject in itself brings us a certain repugnance, firstly because of the force of the word in the expression Search and Seizure and secondly, because Law 4.

728/65 was added by the military dictatorship, of greater violence with the terms of Decree Law No. 966/69.

In order to defend the interests of industry and the commercialisation of products that had stagnated since the crisis of 1964, unemployment, revolts and strikes that resulted in the military coup, the military government created the appendix that would guarantee greater security for companies to the detriment of consumers, transferring to them the business risks inherent in all mercantile and commercial activity, instead of exposing entrepreneurs to the law of supply and demand. .