EBERHARDT, Judge.
The allegations of the petition in this trover action were that the seller was entitled to immediate possession of the automobile under the terms of a sales contract. The buyer refused to relinquish possession. Defendant's general demurrer was overruled and he excepts. Held:
1. The overruling of the demurrer was proper, as the right of immediate possession alone will support a trover action. Youngblood v. Ruis, 96 Ga. App. 290 ( 99 S.E.2d 714); Jones v. Brown, 108 Ga. App. 776, 780 ( 134 S.E.2d 440).
2. The buyer agreed under the terms of the contract that "in the event that I am separated from the employment of Radio Cab [the seller] for any reason I will leave in [its] . . . possession . . . the above described property . . . , until satisfactory settlement of balance due is made." We find no merit in the defendant's contention that this portion of the contract was "too vague for enforcement" or "incapable of intelligent interpretation." "Satisfactory settlement" in this context can only mean payment by the buyer of the balance owing on the purchase price in money or in some medium acceptable to the seller.
Judgment affirmed. Nichols, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.
SUBMITTED SEPTEMBER 10, 1965 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 21, 1965.