Mathews v. Peoples Natural Gas Co.

Citations

• 179 Pa. 165
• 39 W.N.C. 544
• 36 A. 216
• 1897 Pa. LEXIS 617

Syllabus

<p>Lease — Oil and gas lease — Forfeiture—Rent.</p> <p>Plaintiff leased two vacant lots intended for building purposes to defendant for oil and gas purposes. The lease contained these provisions: “The party of the second part covenants to commence operations on this land for said purpose within three months from the execution of this lease, or thereafter pay the party of the first part fifty (50) dollars per month until work is commenced; to be paid each month in advance. .... And after work is commenced it is to be prosecuted with due diligence until completion. ... It is mutually understood and agreed by both parties hereto, that in no ease shall the commencing of a well on the above described land be delayed beyond a period of six months from date of this lease, and if no well is commenced inside of said six months the penalty to be a forfeiture of this lease, and neither party being held further. And it is further understood and agreed that a well drilled on either of above described lots will hold the lease on the other lot for the full term of the lease.” The lease reserved to the lessor the right to use the premises, except such part as should be necessary for the drilling of wells. About one year after the date of the lease, plaintiff entered on one of the lots- and built a house. At this time, however, a stake had been set by defendant indicating the site of a future well, and it appeared that the building would not have materially interfered with the operation. Three years after the date of the lease plaintiff conveyed by deed one of the lots to another person without reservation of any right of defendant as lessee to the oil and gas. Held, (1) that the clause of forfeiture contained in the lease was for the benefit of the lessor; (2) that the erection of the building on one of the lots was not an assertion of the right of forfeiture; (3) that the absolute conveyance of one of the lots was a constructive eviction of defendant, and ended his liability for r