The trial court sustained a summary judgment to plaintiffs’ action. The point in the case is whether under an oil and gas lease, paying production from the tract extended the lease beyond the primary term to three other tracts described in the lease.

The lease was of “the following described land situated in Starr County, to-witThis was followed by a description of the four non-contiguous tracts of land. In the absence of anything in the lease to indicate a contrary intent, production on one tract perpetuated the lease as to all the land described. Cain v. Neumann, Tex.Civ. App., 316 S.W.2d 915; Hillegust v. Amerada Petroleum Corp., Tex.Civ.App., 282 S.W.2d 892; DaCamara v. Binney, Tex.Civ.App., 146 S.W.2d 440; Hunt Production Co. v. Dickerson, Tex.Civ.App., 135 S.W.2d 597; Texas Co. v. Curry, Tex. Civ.App., 229 S.W. 643; McCallister v. Texas Co., Tex.Civ.App., 223 S.W. 859; 2 Summers, Oil and Gas (Perm.Ed.), § 295.

The judgment is affirmed.