Building lease is not automatically permanent; month-to-month tenancy applies absent proof of contrary contract or usage.

A lease of land for building purposes is not, by rule of law, a permanent lease. Under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, a lease for a purpose other than agriculture or manufacture is deemed to be month to month and terminable at the lessor's will unless a contract, local law, or usage shows otherwise. On the facts, the evidence supported only an ordinary tenancy, and the presence of a permanent structure on the land did not create a universal rule of permanence. The lease was treated as a month-to-month tenancy.

---

---

Issues: Whether a lease of land for building purposes is, by rule of law, a permanent lease.

Analysis: Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act provides that a lease for purposes other than agriculture or manufacture is deemed to be a lease from month to month, terminable at the will of the lessor, unless there is proof of a contract or local law or usage to the contrary. The evidence accepted by the courts below showed an ordinary tenancy and did not establish any term creating a permanent lease. The existence of a permanent structure on the land did not justify a general rule that every building lease is permanent.

Conclusion: The proposition was rejected. The lease was not held to be permanent and was treated as a month-to-month tenancy.

---