In the same line of authorities is that of Bain v. Graber, 271 Ky. 393, 112 S.W.2d 66. This case, like La. Oil Ref. v. Haltom, supra, is one covering the law of fixtures, and we think is not applicable to the case under consideration for the reason that the pipe, subject to controversy, may not be treated, under the facts here presented, as fixtures, nor was the property involved in the case of La. Oil Ref. Corp. v. Haltom, supra, treated in any other manner except as fixtures. So, also, is the case of Paton v. Woodrow, another Kentucky case, 198 Ky. 85, 248 S.W. 226. The first case we find in that kindred jurisdiction, involving the question of storage of personal property on the land of another than the owner, is that of Bertram v. Bradley, 257 Ky. 751, 79 S.W.2d 197. In that case piping and machinery were stored. They were left there for a long time.

What constitutes reasonable time is a question of fact that must be determined from the facts and surrounding circumstances of each case. Appellant relies on the cases of Bertram v. Bradley, 257 Ky. 751, 79 S.W.2d 197, and Duff v. Bailey, 96 S.W. 577, 29 Ky. Law Rep. 919. In the Bertram v. Bradley Case, supra, when the lessee left the premises he gathered up some machinery used in connection with the development and stored it in a building erected for that purpose on the leased land, under an agreement between the then owner of the property and the then owner of the lease, in consideration of a stipulated rental to be paid monthly for the storing privilege. It was held that the rental agreement and storage of the machinery created the relation of landlord and tenant and a mere lien on the stored machinery for unpaid rent.