Answer:
The case of Dato ArRahman involves a dispute over a property at the Platinum Park, Kuala Lumpur. One of the key pieces of evidence in the case is related to the exclusive use of room No. 1109 by Hooman Khanloo, the appellant in the case.
According to the evidence presented in the case, Hooman Khanloo had exclusive use of room No. 1109 for a period of time. The evidence shows that the appellant was the only person who had access to the room and had the authority to use it. The evidence also shows that Hooman Khanloo had been living in the room for some time and had made significant changes to the room to make it his own.
In addition to this, the evidence shows that Hooman Khanloo had been paying the rent for the room and had been using it for his personal and business purposes. The appellant had also made significant investments in the room, such as purchasing and installing furniture and equipment.
The evidence presented in the case also includes witness testimony that supports the claim of Hooman Khanloo's exclusive use of the room. Witnesses who had interacted with Hooman Khanloo in the past testified that they had seen him using the room for various purposes, including business meetings and personal use.
Overall, the evidence presented in the case suggests that Hooman Khanloo had exclusive use of room No. 1109 for a significant period of time and had made significant investments in the room. This evidence is important because it helps establish the appellant's claim to the property and supports his argument that he had a right to continue using the room.