Appellant Hammonds owns a 2.3 acre tract of land in Cobb County, a portion of which he leased to appellee Huddle House, Inc., which it in turn subleased to a co-appellee. Appellees operate a Huddle House restaurant on the leased premises. Hammonds subsequently entered into an oral agreement to sell a separate portion of the 2.3 acre tract to the owner of a controlling interest in co-appellant Robuster's, Inc. Appellees brought suit against both appellants seeking to enjoin them from violating a restriction in the Hammonds-Huddle House lease prohibiting a competitive use within a one mile radius of the leased premises. The trial court enjoined the violation of the restriction.
The primary rule for the interpretation of restrictive covenants is to ascertain the intention of the parties from the entire context of the agreement. Leavell v. State Hwy. Dept., 121 Ga. App. 112 (173 SE2d 124) (1970)
. It is clear from the language used in the lease that if it was within Hammonds' power to prevent a competitive use within one mile of the Huddle House, he was to do so. Having received the benefit of his initial bargain, he should not be permitted to repudiate the covenant he made in order to obtain that bargain, when it is within his power to carry it out. The trial court did not err in granting the injunction. Citizens & Southern Bank of Dublin v. Morris State Bldg. Corp., supra.