Appeal from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County, March T., 1967, No. 161, in case of Michael P. Wellman v. Chris Lampros and Cecelia Lampros, individually, and Chris Lampros and Cecelia Lampros, doing business as Lampros Amusement Company.
Nathan Routman, with him Routman, Moore & Goldstone, for appellant.
Philip E. Brockway, with him Brockway, Brockway and Kuhn, for appellees.
Bell, C. J., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts. Mr. Justice Cohen joins in this dissenting opinion.
Dissenting Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts:
Of the issues involved in this litigation, I believe the court below correctly resolved all but one. Appellant, the lessee of a drive-in movie owned by appellees, contends that appellees failed at the termination of the lease to permit him to remove car heaters valued at $3,750 which appellant claims are his property. Appellees, on the other hand, cite two provisions in the lease as establishing their right to retain the heaters. The court below agreed and, on this count of the complaint, entered judgment for appellees.
The two provisions in question provide: "Sixth: It is further specifically understood that the Lessee does not have the right to expand or remove from the leased premises any of the facilities and improvements located thereon, unless the specific written permission of the Lessors has been given, and the Lessee agrees that at the termination of the within lease . . . to return the aforesaid premises in the same condition and repair as when received by him, subject only to reasonable wear and tear.
"The above is also to include all personal property necessary for the operation ...