All Exams >
CLAT >
Weekly Test for CLAT UG >
All Questions
All questions of Week 3 for CLAT Exam
In spite of his __________ Stevie Wonder became a top singer.- a)INAPTITUDE
- b) DISABILITY
- c) UNCAPACITY
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In spite of his __________ Stevie Wonder became a top singer.
a)
INAPTITUDE
b)
DISABILITY
c)
UNCAPACITY
|
Ishita Reddy answered |
Disability is the answer to the question. It is because a person became a top singer because of his hard works and talent.
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements :
No cream is a lemon.
All lemons are onions.
All cream is a grapes.
Conclusion :
(i) Some grapes are not onions.
(ii) All lemons are grapes is a possibility
- a)If only conclusion I follows;
- b)If only conclusion II follows;
- c)If either I or II follows;
- d)If neither I nor II follows; and
- e)If both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements :
Q.
Statements :
No cream is a lemon.
All lemons are onions.
All cream is a grapes.
Conclusion :
(i) Some grapes are not onions.
(ii) All lemons are grapes is a possibility
a)
If only conclusion I follows;
b)
If only conclusion II follows;
c)
If either I or II follows;
d)
If neither I nor II follows; and
e)
If both I and II follow
|
Shivshankar Shaw answered |
Ans is D because all cream is grapes and no cream is lemon so no possibility is all lemons are grapes
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:
Some chairs are tables.
All tables are pots.
All pots are mats.
Some mats are buses.
Conclusions:
I. Some buses are tables.
II. Some mats are chairs.
III. No bus is tables.
IV. Some mats are tables.
- a)I, II and IV follow
- b)II, III and IV follow
- c)Either I or III and II follow
- d)Either I or III and IV follow
- e)Either I or III and II and IV follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:
Some chairs are tables.
All tables are pots.
All pots are mats.
Some mats are buses.
Statements:
Some chairs are tables.
All tables are pots.
All pots are mats.
Some mats are buses.
Conclusions:
I. Some buses are tables.
II. Some mats are chairs.
III. No bus is tables.
IV. Some mats are tables.
a)
I, II and IV follow
b)
II, III and IV follow
c)
Either I or III and II follow
d)
Either I or III and IV follow
e)
Either I or III and II and IV follow
|
Aradhana Shukla answered |
A is correct answer
Statements :Some trees one are mangoes.All mangoes are bananas.All tomatoes are bananas.Conclusions:(i) All trees are tomatoes is a possibility.(ii) No bananas are tree is a possibility.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
Some trees one are mangoes.
All mangoes are bananas.
All tomatoes are bananas.
Conclusions:
(i) All trees are tomatoes is a possibility.
(ii) No bananas are tree is a possibility.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
Faizan Khan answered |
The answer is A because some mangoes are trees and all mangoes are bananas so some mangoes which are tree would come into bananas always hence conclusion II is not implicit.
Can you explain the answer of this question below:You can always rely on Alex. He is very _____________.
- A:
SUPPORTIVE
- B:
DEPENDABLE
- C:
TRUSTFUL
The answer is B.
You can always rely on Alex. He is very _____________.
SUPPORTIVE
DEPENDABLE
TRUSTFUL
|
Meera Rana answered |
Dependable means trustworthy and reliable.
Statements :All dusters are bowls.All bowls are shoes.No shoe is a root.All roots are flowers.Q. Conclusions :(i) No flower is a bowl.(ii) All dusters are shoes.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
All dusters are bowls.
All bowls are shoes.
No shoe is a root.
All roots are flowers.
Q. Conclusions :
(i) No flower is a bowl.
(ii) All dusters are shoes.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
Anaya Patel answered |
It is clear from the venn diagram that both the conclusions follow.
To resume negotiations means to :
- a)Summarize the main points
- b)Reach an agreement
- c)Start again after a break
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
To resume negotiations means to :
a)
Summarize the main points
b)
Reach an agreement
c)
Start again after a break
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
- Break off negotiations (=stop them). The two companies have broken off negotiations on the deal.
- Resume negotiations (=start them again)
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q. Statements: All birds are horses. All horses are tigers. Some tigers are lions. Some lions are donkey.Conclusions: I. Some tigers are horses.II. Some donkeys are birds.III. Some tigers are birds.IV. Some donkeys are horses.- a)I and III follow
- b)I, II and III follow
- c)II, III and IV follow
- d)All I, II, III and IV follow
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q. Statements: All birds are horses. All horses are tigers. Some tigers are lions. Some lions are donkey.
Conclusions:
I. Some tigers are horses.
II. Some donkeys are birds.
III. Some tigers are birds.
IV. Some donkeys are horses.
a)
I and III follow
b)
I, II and III follow
c)
II, III and IV follow
d)
All I, II, III and IV follow
e)
None of the above
|
Kiran Reddy answered |
Conclusions:
I. True
II. False
III. True
IV. False
So, only conclusion I & III follow
I. True
II. False
III. True
IV. False
So, only conclusion I & III follow
"Could you fill me in?" means :- a)could you bring me some food?
- b) could you give me information I don't have?
- c)could you replace me?
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
"Could you fill me in?" means :
a)
could you bring me some food?
b)
could you give me information I don't have?
c)
could you replace me?
|
|
Prisha Sarkar answered |
Fill someone in (on someone or something)
To tell someone the details about someone or something. Please fill me in on what happened last night. Please fill in the committee on the details.
To tell someone the details about someone or something. Please fill me in on what happened last night. Please fill in the committee on the details.
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:
All cups are bottles.
Some bottles are mugs.
No mug is a plate.
Some plates are tables.
Conclusions:
I. Some tables are bottles.
II. Some plates are cups
III. No table is a bottle.
IV. Some mugs are cups.
- a)Only I follows
- b)Only II follows
- c)Only III and || follows
- d)Only IV follows
- e) only III follows
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:
All cups are bottles.
Some bottles are mugs.
No mug is a plate.
Some plates are tables.
Statements:
All cups are bottles.
Some bottles are mugs.
No mug is a plate.
Some plates are tables.
Conclusions:
I. Some tables are bottles.
II. Some plates are cups
III. No table is a bottle.
IV. Some mugs are cups.
a)
Only I follows
b)
Only II follows
c)
Only III and || follows
d)
Only IV follows
e)
only III follows
|
Harshitha Datta answered |
The Venn diagram for the syllogism is as shown below:
The conclusions I and III are complementary in nature ie. One of the two has to be correct universally and both can't be correct at the same time. And the other conclusions are false. Hence, option (E) is the right asnwer.
Statements :All mobiles are cellular.All cellular are machanics.All microphones are mobiles.Q. Conclusions :(i) Some machanics which one mobiles are also a part of microphones.(ii) All microphones are cellular.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
All mobiles are cellular.
All cellular are machanics.
All microphones are mobiles.
Q. Conclusions :
(i) Some machanics which one mobiles are also a part of microphones.
(ii) All microphones are cellular.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
|
Kiran Reddy answered |
The correct option is E.
It is clear from the venn diagram.
It is clear from the venn diagram.
Who won the Nobel Prize 2020 in Literature?- a)Bob Dylan
- b)Kazuo Ishiguro
- c)Peter Handke
- d)Louise Glück
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Who won the Nobel Prize 2020 in Literature?
a)
Bob Dylan
b)
Kazuo Ishiguro
c)
Peter Handke
d)
Louise Glück
|
Dia Mehta answered |
Louise Glück won the Nobel Prize in Literature 2020 for her unmistakable poetic voice that with austere beauty makes individual existence universal.
You should _________________ the opportuity to travel with a guide.
- a)DOWN
- b)JUMP
- c)SEIZE
- d)NONE OF THESE
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
You should _________________ the opportuity to travel with a guide.
a)
DOWN
b)
JUMP
c)
SEIZE
d)
NONE OF THESE
|
Lalit Yadav answered |
'Seize' should be used here. Seize: to take hold of something.
Statements :All mobiles are cellular.All cellular are machanics.All microphones are mobiles.Q. Conclusions :(i) No microphone is mechanic is a possibility.(ii) Some microphones are not cellular.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
All mobiles are cellular.
All cellular are machanics.
All microphones are mobiles.
Q. Conclusions :
(i) No microphone is mechanic is a possibility.
(ii) Some microphones are not cellular.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is D.
From the venn diagram it is clear that
all microphones are possible to be mechanic and Some microphones are cellular.
From the venn diagram it is clear that
all microphones are possible to be mechanic and Some microphones are cellular.
Statements :All pencils are pens.Some pens are stickers.All stickers are numbers.Some number are erasers.Q. Conclusions :(i) Some numbers are pens.(ii) Some numbers are stickers.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
All pencils are pens.
Some pens are stickers.
All stickers are numbers.
Some number are erasers.
Q. Conclusions :
(i) Some numbers are pens.
(ii) Some numbers are stickers.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q. Statements: Some seeds are flowers. All flowers are trees. All trees are leaves. Some leaves are plantsConclusions:I. Some plants are flowers.II. Some leaves are seeds.III. Some leaves are flowers.- a)I and II follow
- b)I and III follow
- c)II and III follow
- d)All I, II and III follow
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q. Statements: Some seeds are flowers. All flowers are trees. All trees are leaves. Some leaves are plants
Conclusions:
I. Some plants are flowers.
II. Some leaves are seeds.
III. Some leaves are flowers.
a)
I and II follow
b)
I and III follow
c)
II and III follow
d)
All I, II and III follow
e)
None of the above
|
|
Kiran Reddy answered |
It is clear from the venn diagram that only conclusion 2 and 3 follows.
A takes twice as much time as B or thrice as much time as C to finish a piece of work; working together they can finish the work in 2 days. In how many days B can do the work alone?
- a)12 days
- b)4 days
- c)8 days
- d)6 days
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
A takes twice as much time as B or thrice as much time as C to finish a piece of work; working together they can finish the work in 2 days. In how many days B can do the work alone?
a)
12 days
b)
4 days
c)
8 days
d)
6 days
e)
None of these
|
|
Umang Singh answered |
Let c can finish a piece of work in x days.then a will finish the work in 3x days and b will finish in 1.5x days adding 1 day work of all three we get 1/x+1/3x/1/1.5x= 1/2 we will get x=4 and finally b will finish work in 1.5 ×4 = 6days
A alone can complete a work in 12 days, while A and B together can complete the same work in 8 days. The number of days that B will take to complete the work alone is- a)10 days
- b)24 days
- c)20 days
- d)9 days
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A alone can complete a work in 12 days, while A and B together can complete the same work in 8 days. The number of days that B will take to complete the work alone is
a)
10 days
b)
24 days
c)
20 days
d)
9 days
e)
None of these
|
Shanaya Sharma answered |
A can complete a work in = 12 days
In 1 day , A can do = 1/12 work
A+B can complete the work in = 8 days
In 1 day , A+B can do = 1/8 work
In 1 day , B can do = 1/8 - 1/12
= 1/24 work
B completes a work in = 24 days
In 1 day , A can do = 1/12 work
A+B can complete the work in = 8 days
In 1 day , A+B can do = 1/8 work
In 1 day , B can do = 1/8 - 1/12
= 1/24 work
B completes a work in = 24 days
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q. Statements: All cards are notes. All notes are tyres. All tyres are books. All books are rods.Conclusions: I. Some rods are notes.II. Some books are tyres.III. Some tyres are cards- a)I and II follow
- b)I and III follow
- c)II and III follow
- d)All I, II and III follow
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q. Statements: All cards are notes. All notes are tyres. All tyres are books. All books are rods.
Conclusions:
I. Some rods are notes.
II. Some books are tyres.
III. Some tyres are cards
a)
I and II follow
b)
I and III follow
c)
II and III follow
d)
All I, II and III follow
e)
None of the above
|
|
Kaavya Nair answered |
Statements :All dusters are bowls.All bowls are shoes.No shoe is a root.All roots are flowers.Conclusions :(i) No duster is a root.(ii) All flowers are root.- a)if only conclusion I follows;
- b)if only conclusion II follows;
- c)if either I or II follows;
- d)if neither I nor II follows; and
- e)if both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Statements :
All dusters are bowls.
All bowls are shoes.
No shoe is a root.
All roots are flowers.
Conclusions :
(i) No duster is a root.
(ii) All flowers are root.
a)
if only conclusion I follows;
b)
if only conclusion II follows;
c)
if either I or II follows;
d)
if neither I nor II follows; and
e)
if both I and II follow
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is A.
As if all roots are flowers that do not means that all flowers are roots, thus only conclusion 1 follows.
As if all roots are flowers that do not means that all flowers are roots, thus only conclusion 1 follows.
In each of the questions below are given three statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III, You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Statements: Some pens are books. All schools are books. Some colleges are schools.Conclusions: - Some colleges are pens.
- Some pens are schools.
- Some colleges are books.
- a)Only I and II follow
- b)Only II and III follow
- c)Only I and III follow
- d)All follow
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below are given three statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III, You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from the commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Statements: Some pens are books. All schools are books. Some colleges are schools.
Conclusions:
- Some colleges are pens.
- Some pens are schools.
- Some colleges are books.
a)
Only I and II follow
b)
Only II and III follow
c)
Only I and III follow
d)
All follow
e)
None of these
|
Pranjal Kapoor answered |
Some pens are books. All schools are books.
Since the middle term 'books' is not distributed even once in the premises, so no definite conclusion follows.
Some colleges are schools. All schools are books.
Since one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular and should not contain the middle term.
So, it follows that 'Some colleges are books'. Thus, III follows.
Some pens are books. Some colleges are books.
Since both the premises are particular, no definite conclusion can be drawn.
Hence, only III follows.
Can you explain the answer of this question below:After the elections it was discovered that the phones had been _____________.
- A:
CANVASSED
- B:
LEAKED
- C:
BUGGED
The answer is C.
After the elections it was discovered that the phones had been _____________.
CANVASSED
LEAKED
BUGGED
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
After the elections it was discovered that the phones had been bugged.
A work could be completed in 100 days. Due to the absence of 10 workers it was completed in 110 days. The original number of workers was- a)55
- b)100
- c)50
- d)110
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
A work could be completed in 100 days. Due to the absence of 10 workers it was completed in 110 days. The original number of workers was
a)
55
b)
100
c)
50
d)
110
e)
None of these
|
Ishani Rane answered |
Originally let there be x men.
Less men, More days (Indirect Proportion)
Therefore, (x-10) : x :: 100 :110
=> (x - 10) * 110 = x * 100 => x= 110
A piece of work can be done by 6 men and 5 women in 6 days or 3 men and 4 women in 10 days. It can be done by 9 men and 15 women in how many days ?- a)3 days
- b)4 days
- c)5 days
- d)6 days
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
A piece of work can be done by 6 men and 5 women in 6 days or 3 men and 4 women in 10 days. It can be done by 9 men and 15 women in how many days ?
a)
3 days
b)
4 days
c)
5 days
d)
6 days
e)
None of these
|
Avantika Chakraborty answered |
To calculate the answer we need to get 1 man per day work and 1 woman per day work.
Let 1 man 1 day work =x
and 1 woman 1 days work = y.
=> 6x+5y = 1/6
and 3x+4y = 1/10
On solving, we get x = 1/54 and y = 1/90
(9 men + 15 women)'s 1 days work =
(9/54) + (15/90) = 1/3
9 men and 15 women will finish the work in 3 days
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q.
Statements:Some Pencils are Chairs. All Chairs are umbrellas. Some umbrellas are sticks. All sticks are caps.Conclusions:I. Some caps are umbrellas.II. Some umbrellas are sticks.III. Some sticks are pencils.- a)I and II follow
- b)I and III follow
- c)II and III follow
- d)All I, II and III follow
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:Some Pencils are Chairs. All Chairs are umbrellas. Some umbrellas are sticks. All sticks are caps.
Statements:Some Pencils are Chairs. All Chairs are umbrellas. Some umbrellas are sticks. All sticks are caps.
Conclusions:
I. Some caps are umbrellas.
II. Some umbrellas are sticks.
III. Some sticks are pencils.
a)
I and II follow
b)
I and III follow
c)
II and III follow
d)
All I, II and III follow
e)
None of the above
|
Kumaran Raja answered |
How to identify it
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements :
Some mails are chats.
All uploads are chats.
Conclusions :
(i) All mails being uploads is a possibility.
(ii) No upload is a mail.
- a)If only conclusion I follows;
- b)If only conclusion II follows;
- c)If either I or II follows;
- d)If neither I nor II follows; and
- e)If both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements :
Q.
Statements :
Some mails are chats.
All uploads are chats.
Conclusions :
(i) All mails being uploads is a possibility.
(ii) No upload is a mail.
a)
If only conclusion I follows;
b)
If only conclusion II follows;
c)
If either I or II follows;
d)
If neither I nor II follows; and
e)
If both I and II follow
|
Prerna Sen answered |
From the given statements, we can infer that:
- Some chats are mails (from the first statement)
- All uploads are chats (from the second statement)
Using these two statements, we can conclude that:
- Some uploads are mails (since all uploads are chats, and some chats are mails)
Therefore, conclusion I that all mails being uploads is a possibility, logically follows from the given statements.
However, conclusion II that no upload is a mail does not logically follow from the given statements, as we have just shown that some uploads are mails.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 1: If only conclusion I follows.
What is the maximum number of people who can share a Nobel Prize?- a)4
- b)2
- c)3
- d)6
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
What is the maximum number of people who can share a Nobel Prize?
a)
4
b)
2
c)
3
d)
6
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
Three people at maximum can share a Nobel Prize.
Principle: Any direct physical interference with the goods in somebody's possession without lawful justification is called trespass to goods.
Fact: A purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and had sent it to a garage for repair. X, believing, wrongly, that the car was his, removed it from the garage. - a)X cannot be held responsible for trespass to good as he was under a wrong belief.
- b)X can be held responsible for trespass to goods.
- c)X has not committed any wrong.
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: Any direct physical interference with the goods in somebody's possession without lawful justification is called trespass to goods.
Fact: A purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and had sent it to a garage for repair. X, believing, wrongly, that the car was his, removed it from the garage.
Fact: A purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and had sent it to a garage for repair. X, believing, wrongly, that the car was his, removed it from the garage.
a)
X cannot be held responsible for trespass to good as he was under a wrong belief.
b)
X can be held responsible for trespass to goods.
c)
X has not committed any wrong.
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Under section 441 of IPC which defines Criminal trespass that whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with the intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person or with intent to commit an offence.
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q. Statements: Some benches are walls. All walls are houses. Some houses are jungles. All jungles are windows.Conclusions:I. Some windows are benches.II. Some jungles are walls.III. Some houses are benches.IV. Some windows are houses.- a)I and II follow
- b)I and III follow
- c)III and IV follow
- d)II, III and IV follow
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q. Statements: Some benches are walls. All walls are houses. Some houses are jungles. All jungles are windows.
Conclusions:
I. Some windows are benches.
II. Some jungles are walls.
III. Some houses are benches.
IV. Some windows are houses.
a)
I and II follow
b)
I and III follow
c)
III and IV follow
d)
II, III and IV follow
e)
None of the above
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
The correct option is C.
The venn diagram for the question is follow-
The venn diagram for the question is follow-
8 men can do a work in 12 days. After 6 days of work four more men were employed. In how many days would the remaining work be done. - a)2 days
- b)3 days
- c)4 days
- d)5 days
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
8 men can do a work in 12 days. After 6 days of work four more men were employed. In how many days would the remaining work be done.
a)
2 days
b)
3 days
c)
4 days
d)
5 days
e)
None of these
|
Kavya Sharma answered |
Description for Correct answer:
let 1 men does 1 unit of work per day
Total work: 8x12=96units
6 days work of 8 men
=8x6=48 units.
work lelt =96−48=48 units
After 6 days 4 men join. so total men is 12 men (8+4) they will do 12 unit of work per day
Now,
remaining work completed in
=48/12
= 4 days
Principle:
I. An Interference with the use of the property of another person is nuisance.
II. To constitute a tort, an act or an omission must result in the violation of a legal right vested in the plaintiff.
Facts:
Vinay and Navin were old friends and had recently started living next door to each other. Navin cooked delicious steak on barbecue, and Vinay was a fan of Navin’s cooking. Therefore, when it was Vinay’s birthday, he requested Navin to cook the steak for him. Navin agreed happily. However, when he started cooking, the smoke from the barbeque was blown by wind straight into Vinay’s house. Vinay felt nauseated and had to leave the house and stay out all night. Is Navin liable for nuisance?
- a)No, because Vinay asked Navin to prepare steak for him.
- b)Yes, because blowing smoke from a barbeque into another’s house and the smoke causing discomfort is a foreseeable situation.
- c)Yes, because Navin’s act interfered with Vinay’s use of property.
- d)No, because Navin did not know that Vinay would have such a reaction to smoke from barbeque.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle:
I. An Interference with the use of the property of another person is nuisance.
II. To constitute a tort, an act or an omission must result in the violation of a legal right vested in the plaintiff.
I. An Interference with the use of the property of another person is nuisance.
II. To constitute a tort, an act or an omission must result in the violation of a legal right vested in the plaintiff.
Facts:
Vinay and Navin were old friends and had recently started living next door to each other. Navin cooked delicious steak on barbecue, and Vinay was a fan of Navin’s cooking. Therefore, when it was Vinay’s birthday, he requested Navin to cook the steak for him. Navin agreed happily. However, when he started cooking, the smoke from the barbeque was blown by wind straight into Vinay’s house. Vinay felt nauseated and had to leave the house and stay out all night. Is Navin liable for nuisance?
Vinay and Navin were old friends and had recently started living next door to each other. Navin cooked delicious steak on barbecue, and Vinay was a fan of Navin’s cooking. Therefore, when it was Vinay’s birthday, he requested Navin to cook the steak for him. Navin agreed happily. However, when he started cooking, the smoke from the barbeque was blown by wind straight into Vinay’s house. Vinay felt nauseated and had to leave the house and stay out all night. Is Navin liable for nuisance?
a)
No, because Vinay asked Navin to prepare steak for him.
b)
Yes, because blowing smoke from a barbeque into another’s house and the smoke causing discomfort is a foreseeable situation.
c)
Yes, because Navin’s act interfered with Vinay’s use of property.
d)
No, because Navin did not know that Vinay would have such a reaction to smoke from barbeque.
|
Aspire Academy answered |
The Principle is quite wide in scope and does not create a distinction between authorized and unauthorized interference with the use of property. Thus, the interference under this principle would amount to nuisance.
Principle:I. A person can be held guilty under the tort of negligence only if there is proximate cause and the damage is not too remoteII. Proximate cause means that you must be able to show that the harm was caused by the tort you are suing forIII. Proximate cause may be doubtful when a superseding intervening cause happens shortly after the injury.Facts: Bantu was playing in the school soccer field when he got hit hard by the ball in his chest by a friend. He fell unconscious and suffered severe internal injuries. His mother decided to sue for the tort of negligence.Which of the following is correct?- a) The damage to Bantu was due to proximate cause
- b) The damage to Bantu was remote
- c) The damage to Bantu was due to superseding intervening cause
- d) None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle:
I. A person can be held guilty under the tort of negligence only if there is proximate cause and the damage is not too remote
II. Proximate cause means that you must be able to show that the harm was caused by the tort you are suing for
III. Proximate cause may be doubtful when a superseding intervening cause happens shortly after the injury.
Facts: Bantu was playing in the school soccer field when he got hit hard by the ball in his chest by a friend. He fell unconscious and suffered severe internal injuries. His mother decided to sue for the tort of negligence.
Which of the following is correct?
a)
The damage to Bantu was due to proximate cause
b)
The damage to Bantu was remote
c)
The damage to Bantu was due to superseding intervening cause
d)
None of the above
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Going by principles I and II, it is clear that Bantu was injured as a direct result of being hit by the ball on the soccer field, and neither the cause nor the damage was too remote. Thus, it may be deduced that the damage to Bantu was due to proximate cause.
Harvey J. Alter, Michael Houghton and Charles M. Rice won Nobel Prize 2020 in which field?- a)Physiology or Medicine
- b)Literature
- c)Peace prize
- d)Economic Science
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Harvey J. Alter, Michael Houghton and Charles M. Rice won Nobel Prize 2020 in which field?
a)
Physiology or Medicine
b)
Literature
c)
Peace prize
d)
Economic Science
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
Harvey J. Alter, Michael Houghton and Charles M. Rice won Nobel Prize 2020 in Medicine for their discovery of Hepatitis C virus.
Principle: Nuisance as a tort (civil wrong) means an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it.
Fact: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 Kg. of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought an action for nuisance against the defendant. - a)The defendant was not liable for nuisance
- b)The defendant was liable under the principle of strict liability
- c)The defendant is liable for nuisance
- d)The plaintiff's suit should be decreed in his favour
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: Nuisance as a tort (civil wrong) means an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it.
Fact: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 Kg. of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought an action for nuisance against the defendant.
Fact: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 Kg. of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought an action for nuisance against the defendant.
a)
The defendant was not liable for nuisance
b)
The defendant was liable under the principle of strict liability
c)
The defendant is liable for nuisance
d)
The plaintiff's suit should be decreed in his favour
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
The defendant is liable for nuisance as it was his duty to manage the queues of customers that was effecting the neighbouring shops. Nuisance, in law, is a human action or a physical condition that is destructive or hostile to other people and offers ascend to a reason for the activity. An open irritation made in an open spot or on open land, or influencing the ethics, security, or soundness of the network, is viewed as an offence against the state.
Principle: Whoever stores a substance that could potentially cause damage on escape shall be absolutely liable for any damage caused by the escape of such substance from its premises. The person will be liable for the tort of negligence. Facts: Prerna and Anurag decide to buy a mini- chemical capsule for their scientific experiments. The minuscule capsule has great potentiality for damage if broken, and hence Prerna and Anurag take complete precautions against that. However, one day the capsule breaks due to an earthquake. Their neighbour, Bajaj, rushes into their premises to check what caused the loud sound that accompanied the breakage of the object. Prerna and Anurag ensure that the damage is contained within the premises of the room. However, their neighbour, Bajaj, sues them for the damage caused to him due to contact with the toxic object.- a)Bajaj was responsible for entering their premises and cannot sue Prerna or Anurag for his stupidity.
- b)The object did not escape the premises, and hence Prerna and Anurag would not be liable.
- c)The act of keeping a dangerous object would in itself make Prerna and Anurag absolutely liable.
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: Whoever stores a substance that could potentially cause damage on escape shall be absolutely liable for any damage caused by the escape of such substance from its premises. The person will be liable for the tort of negligence.
Facts: Prerna and Anurag decide to buy a mini- chemical capsule for their scientific experiments. The minuscule capsule has great potentiality for damage if broken, and hence Prerna and Anurag take complete precautions against that. However, one day the capsule breaks due to an earthquake. Their neighbour, Bajaj, rushes into their premises to check what caused the loud sound that accompanied the breakage of the object. Prerna and Anurag ensure that the damage is contained within the premises of the room. However, their neighbour, Bajaj, sues them for the damage caused to him due to contact with the toxic object.
a)
Bajaj was responsible for entering their premises and cannot sue Prerna or Anurag for his stupidity.
b)
The object did not escape the premises, and hence Prerna and Anurag would not be liable.
c)
The act of keeping a dangerous object would in itself make Prerna and Anurag absolutely liable.
d)
None of the above.
|
Radhika Koli answered |
According to the principal the person would be liable for the damage caused by a dangerous substance owned by him/her if it was because of their own negligence. But as stated In the question , Damage was caused because of the Act of God i.e Earthquake. Act of God is something which is beyond human control.
Therefore, Prerna and Anurag would not be liable since the damage caused was not because of their negligence but Act of God.
I hope this clears your doubt .
Therefore, Prerna and Anurag would not be liable since the damage caused was not because of their negligence but Act of God.
I hope this clears your doubt .
If 12 men and 16 boys can do a piece work in 5 days, 13 men and 24 boys can do it in four days then the ratio of the work done daily by a man and a boy is?- a)3 : 1
- b)2 : 1
- c)5 : 4
- d)4 : 5
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
If 12 men and 16 boys can do a piece work in 5 days, 13 men and 24 boys can do it in four days then the ratio of the work done daily by a man and a boy is?
a)
3 : 1
b)
2 : 1
c)
5 : 4
d)
4 : 5
e)
None of these
|
Arya Gaddam answered |
Let's consider
x=men and y=boys
by first condition,
12x+16y=1/5
by second condition,
13x+24y=1/4
by solving them we get
x=1/100 and y=1/200
so x:y=2:1
x=men and y=boys
by first condition,
12x+16y=1/5
by second condition,
13x+24y=1/4
by solving them we get
x=1/100 and y=1/200
so x:y=2:1
72 men can build a wall 280 m long in 21 days. How many men will take 18 days to build a similar type of a wall of length 100 m.- a)28
- b)18
- c)10
- d)30
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
72 men can build a wall 280 m long in 21 days. How many men will take 18 days to build a similar type of a wall of length 100 m.
a)
28
b)
18
c)
10
d)
30
e)
None of these
|
|
Umang Singh answered |
Ans will be d we have to apply simple formula ie 72× 21×10÷280=18.x÷100 then we will get x= 30
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q.
Statements: Some Clothes are lamps. Some flowers are lamps. Some lamps are dresses. All dresses are shirts.Conclusions:I. Some shirts are ClothesII. Some shirts are flowers.III. Some flowers are Clothes.IV. Some dresses are Clothes.- a)None follows
- b)Only I follows
- c)Only II follows
- d)Only III follows
- e)Only IV follows
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In the questions below are given four statements followed by for conclusions numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to the take given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements: Some Clothes are lamps. Some flowers are lamps. Some lamps are dresses. All dresses are shirts.
Statements: Some Clothes are lamps. Some flowers are lamps. Some lamps are dresses. All dresses are shirts.
Conclusions:
I. Some shirts are Clothes
II. Some shirts are flowers.
III. Some flowers are Clothes.
IV. Some dresses are Clothes.
a)
None follows
b)
Only I follows
c)
Only II follows
d)
Only III follows
e)
Only IV follows
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
A is the correct option
lamps = some clothes, some flowers and some dresses.
All dresses are shirts, meaning, some lamps are shirts.
lamps = some clothes, some flowers and some dresses.
All dresses are shirts, meaning, some lamps are shirts.
Hence, none of the conclusion is correct.
Principle:I. Slander is any defamation that is spoken or heard.II. Libel is any defamation that can be seen like writing, printing, movie, statue etc.Facts: Meeta and Reeta are both popular actresses in the Hindi film industry. They were the best of friends. However, when Meeta was replaced by Reeta in a film, she came on the sets of the film and interrupted the shooting. She started ranting on how Reeta used to pay directors and producers in order to compel them to cast her. Following this public outburst, Reeta lost out on major endorsement deals as companies were apprehensive about her damaged reputation.- a) Reeta can sue Meeta for libel.
- b) Reeta can sue Meeta for slander.
- c) Reeta cannot sue Meeta for none of the statements made by Meeta were published.
- d) Reeta can sue Meeta for a criminal wrong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle:
I. Slander is any defamation that is spoken or heard.
II. Libel is any defamation that can be seen like writing, printing, movie, statue etc.
Facts: Meeta and Reeta are both popular actresses in the Hindi film industry. They were the best of friends. However, when Meeta was replaced by Reeta in a film, she came on the sets of the film and interrupted the shooting. She started ranting on how Reeta used to pay directors and producers in order to compel them to cast her. Following this public outburst, Reeta lost out on major endorsement deals as companies were apprehensive about her damaged reputation.
a)
Reeta can sue Meeta for libel.
b)
Reeta can sue Meeta for slander.
c)
Reeta cannot sue Meeta for none of the statements made by Meeta were published.
d)
Reeta can sue Meeta for a criminal wrong
|
|
Rohit Jain answered |
As per the principle given in the question, slander is a form of defamation which is spoken or heard. In the instant case, Meeta engaged in making derogatory remarks about Reeta in a public place because of which Reeta suffered professionally as well. Hence, Reeta can sue Meeta for slander.
Each of the questions below contains a number of sentences. Each sentence has pairs of word(s)/phrase(s) that are highlighted. From the highlighted word(s)/phrase(s), select the most appropriate word(s)/phrase(s) to form correct sentences. Then, from the options given, choose the best one.The cricket council that was[A]/were[B] elected last March is[A]/are[B] at sixes and sevens over new rules. The critics censored[A]/censured[B] the new movie because of its social inaccessibility. Amit’s explanation for missing the meeting was credulous[A]/credible[B]. She coughed discreetly[A]/discretely[B] to announce her presence.- a)BBAAA
- b)AAABA
- c)BBBBA
- d)AABBA
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Each of the questions below contains a number of sentences. Each sentence has pairs of word(s)/phrase(s) that are highlighted. From the highlighted word(s)/phrase(s), select the most appropriate word(s)/phrase(s) to form correct sentences. Then, from the options given, choose the best one.
The cricket council that was[A]/were[B] elected last March is[A]/are[B] at sixes and sevens over new rules. The critics censored[A]/censured[B] the new movie because of its social inaccessibility. Amit’s explanation for missing the meeting was credulous[A]/credible[B]. She coughed discreetly[A]/discretely[B] to announce her presence.
a)
BBAAA
b)
AAABA
c)
BBBBA
d)
AABBA
|
EduRev GMAT answered |
Answer: Option D
The first sentence is the easiest to decide. Since the ‘cricket council’ is singular, singular verbs (was and is) are required. Hence, the answer choice should begin with A. This eliminates options 1, 3, and 5.
Comparing options 2 and 4, the difference is in the third choice – censored versus censured. Censored means examined in order to delete anything that is objectionable. Censured means criticised. Critics would criticise or censure a movie because of its social inaccessibility - hence, B. This eliminates option 2.
Credulous means ready to believe easily and credible means offering reasonable grounds for being believed. Hence, Amit’s explanation is credible – B.
Discrete means distinct; discreet means modest, unnoticeable.
Hence, the correct answer is option 4.
Comparing options 2 and 4, the difference is in the third choice – censored versus censured. Censored means examined in order to delete anything that is objectionable. Censured means criticised. Critics would criticise or censure a movie because of its social inaccessibility - hence, B. This eliminates option 2.
Credulous means ready to believe easily and credible means offering reasonable grounds for being believed. Hence, Amit’s explanation is credible – B.
Discrete means distinct; discreet means modest, unnoticeable.
Hence, the correct answer is option 4.
Each of the questions below contains a number of sentences. Each sentence has pairs of word(s)/phrase(s) that are highlighted. From the highlighted word(s)/phrase(s), select the most appropriate word(s)/phrase(s) to form correct sentences. Then, from the options given, choose the best one.Regrettably[A]/Regretfully[B] I have to decline your invitation. I am drawn to the poetic, sensual[A]/sensuous[B] quality of her paintings. He was besides[A]/beside[B] himself with rage when I told him what I had done. After brushing against a stationary[A]/stationery[B] truck my car turned turtle. As the water began to rise over[A]/above[B] the danger mark, the signs of an imminent flood were clear.- a)BAABA
- b)BBBAB
- c)AAABA
- d)BBAAB
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Each of the questions below contains a number of sentences. Each sentence has pairs of word(s)/phrase(s) that are highlighted. From the highlighted word(s)/phrase(s), select the most appropriate word(s)/phrase(s) to form correct sentences. Then, from the options given, choose the best one.
Regrettably[A]/Regretfully[B] I have to decline your invitation. I am drawn to the poetic, sensual[A]/sensuous[B] quality of her paintings. He was besides[A]/beside[B] himself with rage when I told him what I had done. After brushing against a stationary[A]/stationery[B] truck my car turned turtle. As the water began to rise over[A]/above[B] the danger mark, the signs of an imminent flood were clear.
a)
BAABA
b)
BBBAB
c)
AAABA
d)
BBAAB
|
|
Navya Yadav answered |
Explanation:
Regrettably vs. Regretfully:
- The correct word here is "Regrettably" as it means with regret or sadly.
Sensual vs. Sensuous:
- The correct word here is "sensuous" as it refers to the enjoyment of the senses.
Besides vs. Beside:
- The correct word here is "beside" as it means next to or alongside.
Stationary vs. Stationery:
- The correct word here is "stationary" as it means not moving or still.
Over vs. Above:
- The correct word here is "above" as it indicates a higher position.
Therefore, the correct sequence of words to form the correct sentences is:
BBBAB.
Regrettably vs. Regretfully:
- The correct word here is "Regrettably" as it means with regret or sadly.
Sensual vs. Sensuous:
- The correct word here is "sensuous" as it refers to the enjoyment of the senses.
Besides vs. Beside:
- The correct word here is "beside" as it means next to or alongside.
Stationary vs. Stationery:
- The correct word here is "stationary" as it means not moving or still.
Over vs. Above:
- The correct word here is "above" as it indicates a higher position.
Therefore, the correct sequence of words to form the correct sentences is:
BBBAB.
In each of the questions, a word/phrase has been used in sentences in five different ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the usage of the word/phrase is incorrect or inappropriate.File- a)I need to file an insurance claim.
- b)The cadets were marching in a single file.
- c)File your nails before you apply nail polish.
- d)When the parade was on, a soldier broke the file.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions, a word/phrase has been used in sentences in five different ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the usage of the word/phrase is incorrect or inappropriate.
File
a)
I need to file an insurance claim.
b)
The cadets were marching in a single file.
c)
File your nails before you apply nail polish.
d)
When the parade was on, a soldier broke the file.
|
|
Palak Yadav answered |
Incorrect Usage of "File"
Sentence Explanation:
- In sentence (a), "file" is used correctly as a verb meaning to submit a formal document.
- In sentence (b), "file" is used correctly as a noun referring to a line of people or things.
- In sentence (c), "file" is used correctly as a verb meaning to shape or smooth something using a file.
- In sentence (d), the word "file" is incorrectly used. In this context, "file" should be replaced with "rank" as it refers to a military formation, not a line of people or things.
Therefore, option 'D' is the correct answer as it contains the incorrect usage of the word "file."
Sentence Explanation:
- In sentence (a), "file" is used correctly as a verb meaning to submit a formal document.
- In sentence (b), "file" is used correctly as a noun referring to a line of people or things.
- In sentence (c), "file" is used correctly as a verb meaning to shape or smooth something using a file.
- In sentence (d), the word "file" is incorrectly used. In this context, "file" should be replaced with "rank" as it refers to a military formation, not a line of people or things.
Therefore, option 'D' is the correct answer as it contains the incorrect usage of the word "file."
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.Q.
Statements:
Some lenses are poles.
All poles are skies.
Some skies are boxes.
No box is a bottle.Conclusions:I. Some bottles are lensII. Some boxes are poles.III. No bottle is a lens.- a) I and II follows
- b)II and III follows
- c)Only I follows
- d)Only II follows
- e)Only III follows
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
In each of the questions below given four statements followed by three conclusions numbered I, II and III. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.
Q.
Statements:
Some lenses are poles.
All poles are skies.
Some skies are boxes.
No box is a bottle.
Statements:
Some lenses are poles.
All poles are skies.
Some skies are boxes.
No box is a bottle.
Conclusions:
I. Some bottles are lens
II. Some boxes are poles.
III. No bottle is a lens.
a)
I and II follows
b)
II and III follows
c)
Only I follows
d)
Only II follows
e)
Only III follows
|
|
Samaira nayar answered |
Understanding the Statements
The provided statements can be analyzed in detail to draw conclusions logically.
Analyzing the Conclusions
Now we will evaluate each conclusion based on the statements provided.
Final Assessment
Based on the analysis:
- Conclusion I does not follow.
- Conclusion II does not follow.
- Conclusion III logically follows.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'E' as only conclusion III is valid.
The provided statements can be analyzed in detail to draw conclusions logically.
- Some lenses are poles: This means there is at least one lens that is also a pole.
- All poles are skies: Every pole is included in the category of skies.
- Some skies are boxes: There exists at least one sky that is also a box.
- No box is a bottle: Boxes and bottles do not overlap; they are entirely separate categories.
Analyzing the Conclusions
Now we will evaluate each conclusion based on the statements provided.
- Conclusion I: Some bottles are lenses
- This does not logically follow as there is no connection established between bottles and lenses in the statements.
- Conclusion II: Some boxes are poles
- This conclusion is incorrect because while some boxes are skies, and all poles are skies, it does not imply that any boxes are poles.
- Conclusion III: No bottle is a lens
- This conclusion logically follows. Since no box is a bottle and some lenses are associated with poles (which are part of skies), it can be inferred that bottles do not intersect with lenses.
Final Assessment
Based on the analysis:
- Conclusion I does not follow.
- Conclusion II does not follow.
- Conclusion III logically follows.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'E' as only conclusion III is valid.
Each of the following questions has a sentence with two blanks. Given below each question are five pairs of words. Choose the pair that best completes the sentence.Exhaustion of natural resources, destruction of individual initiative by governments, control over men’s minds by central __________ of education and propaganda are some of the major evils which appear to be on the increase as a result of the impact of science upon minds suited by _________ to an earlier kind of world.- a)tenets; fixation
- b)aspects; inhibitions
- c)institutions; inhibitions
- d)organs; tradition
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Each of the following questions has a sentence with two blanks. Given below each question are five pairs of words. Choose the pair that best completes the sentence.
Exhaustion of natural resources, destruction of individual initiative by governments, control over men’s minds by central __________ of education and propaganda are some of the major evils which appear to be on the increase as a result of the impact of science upon minds suited by _________ to an earlier kind of world.
a)
tenets; fixation
b)
aspects; inhibitions
c)
institutions; inhibitions
d)
organs; tradition
|
Wizius Careers answered |
Answer: Option A
The first blank can have ‘institutions’, ‘departments’, ‘organs’ or ‘tenets’. ‘Aspects’, compared to other options can be eliminated.
The second blank has the key to the answer. The phrase ‘suited by’ can be best followed by ‘fixated’, to make the sense complete- minds which were suited by ‘fixation’ or a preoccupation with one subject, issue, an obsession “to an earlier kind of world”. Also, ‘fixation’ flows perfectly with the idea of ‘an earlier kind of world’.
The second blank has the key to the answer. The phrase ‘suited by’ can be best followed by ‘fixated’, to make the sense complete- minds which were suited by ‘fixation’ or a preoccupation with one subject, issue, an obsession “to an earlier kind of world”. Also, ‘fixation’ flows perfectly with the idea of ‘an earlier kind of world’.
Principle:
I. Malicious prosecution under tort law, has the following ingredients:
(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favour of the victim of the malicious prosecution.
II. There is no tort to protect innocent plaintiffs from frivolous defences raised by defendants.
Do the facts indicate a case of malicious prosecution?- a)Yes
- b)No
- c)It depends on the loss sustained by Harry due to the suit.
- d)It cannot be determined.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle:
I. Malicious prosecution under tort law, has the following ingredients:
(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favour of the victim of the malicious prosecution.
II. There is no tort to protect innocent plaintiffs from frivolous defences raised by defendants.
Do the facts indicate a case of malicious prosecution?
I. Malicious prosecution under tort law, has the following ingredients:
(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favour of the victim of the malicious prosecution.
II. There is no tort to protect innocent plaintiffs from frivolous defences raised by defendants.
Do the facts indicate a case of malicious prosecution?
a)
Yes
b)
No
c)
It depends on the loss sustained by Harry due to the suit.
d)
It cannot be determined.
|
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
As per principle (i), malicious prosecution has 3 essential elements: (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favour of the victim of the malicious prosecution. Since all three of these were present in the instant case, thus, a case of malicious prosecution is indeed indicated.
Who won the Nobel Prize for discovering the method for genome editing?- a)George Smith, Frances Arnold and Greg Winter
- b)Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna
- c)Jacques Dubochet, Joachim Frank and Richard Henderson
- d)John B. Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham and Akira Yoshino
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Who won the Nobel Prize for discovering the method for genome editing?
a)
George Smith, Frances Arnold and Greg Winter
b)
Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna
c)
Jacques Dubochet, Joachim Frank and Richard Henderson
d)
John B. Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham and Akira Yoshino
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna together worked on developing the methods for genome editing and jointly won the Noble Prize in Chemistry 2020.
Chapter doubts & questions for Week 3 - Weekly Test for CLAT UG 2025 is part of CLAT exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Week 3 - Weekly Test for CLAT UG in English & Hindi are available as part of CLAT exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Weekly Test for CLAT UG
3 docs|141 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up
within 7 days!
within 7 days!
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup