Explore Exams
Login Signup
Sign in Open App
All Exams  >   CLAT  >   4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG  >   All Questions

All questions of Passage Based for Practice for CLAT Exam

Clear all your doubts with EduRev

6, 11, 21, 36, 56, ?
  • a)
    42                           
  • b)
    81
  • c)
    51                           
  • d)
    91
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Alok Malik answered
Given series: 6, 11, 21, 36, 56, ?

To find the next number in the series, we need to identify the pattern followed by the series.

Pattern:

If we observe the series carefully, we can see that each number in the series is obtained by adding the consecutive odd numbers starting from 1.

6 = 1 + 5
11 = 1 + 5 + 5
21 = 1 + 5 + 5 + 10
36 = 1 + 5 + 5 + 10 + 15
56 = 1 + 5 + 5 + 10 + 15 + 20

So, the next number in the series can be obtained by adding the next odd number, which is 25, to the previous number in the series.

Therefore, the next number in the series is:

56 + 25 = 81

Hence, the correct answer is option 'B' (81).

Examine the following relationship among members of a family of six persons A, B, C, D, E, and F
(a) The number of males equals that of females
(b) A and E are sons of F
(c) D is the mother of two, one boy and one girl
(d) B is the son of A
(e) There is only one married couple in the family at present
Q.
Which of the following inferences can be drawn from the above?
  • a)
    A, B and C are females
  • b)
    A is the husband of D
  • c)
    E and F are children of D
  • d)
    D is the granddaughter of F
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Dia Mehta answered
Clearly, there are three males and three females. Now, A, E and B are sons and hence male. So, C, D and F are females.
D has one male and one female child. Clearly, A and D form a couple having two children, namely B and C. Hence, A is the husband of D.

Directions: In the following questions, a statement or two are followed by two conclusions.
Statement: The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.
Conclusions: I. Even an unscrupulous person has some principles.
II. The real wisdom is to be found in scriptures.
  • a)
    if conclusion I follows;
  • b)
    if conclusion II follows;
  • c)
    if both I and II follow;
  • d)
    if either I or II follows; and
  • e)
    if neither I nor II follows.
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?

Samta garg answered
The given statement is a well-known quote from Shakespeare's play "The Merchant of Venice." It suggests that even someone with malicious intentions can manipulate or use scriptures to support their own purposes. Let's analyze the given conclusions:

I. Even an unscrupulous person has some principles.
This conclusion does not logically follow from the given statement. The statement simply states that the devil can use scripture for his purposes, but it does not imply that an unscrupulous person has principles. There is no direct connection between the two.

II. The real wisdom is to be found in scriptures.
This conclusion also does not logically follow from the given statement. The statement talks about the devil using scripture, but it does not make any claims about the wisdom or truthfulness of scriptures themselves. It is possible for scriptures to contain wisdom, but the statement does not provide any evidence or support for this conclusion.

Therefore, neither conclusion I nor conclusion II can be derived from the given statement. Hence, the correct answer is option E - Neither I nor II follows.

In conclusion, it is important to carefully analyze the given statements and evaluate the logical connection between the statements and the conclusions. In this case, the conclusions do not follow logically from the given statement, leading to the answer being option E.

Directions (7-8): Read the following data and use it for answering the questions that follow:
A sales representative plans to visit each of six companies M, N, P, Q, R and S exactly once during the course of one day.
She is setting up her schedule for the day according to the following conditions.
(1) She must visit M before N and before R
(2) She must visit N before Q
(3) The third company she visits must be P
Q. 
Which of the following could be the order in which the sales representative visits the six companies?
  • a)
    M, R, N, Q, P, S
  • b)
    M, S, P, N, R, Q
  • c)
    P, R, M, S, Q, S
  • d)
    P, S, M, R, Q, N
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Anaya Patel answered
Correct Answer :- b
Explanation : From data 1 : - M > N, M > R
From data 2 : - N > Q
 
Combining these two, M > N > Q and M > R.
Now look for the informations given in each question and combining these with the information 
M > N > Q, M > R and  _ _  P _ _.
 
S is first
S _ P _ _ _ (P is third)
Also M must be followed by N, Q and R.
M must be visited second
 
Since P is third and there are only three places behind P. Also M must be followed by three N, Q and R. Hence, M cannot come before P. i.e. immediately after P she can visit any company except M.

According to the information, P must be in the third place and the order M N Q must not be violated. This is followed only in the arrangement M S P N R Q.

(i) Five Professors (Dr. Joshi, Dr. Davar, Dr. Natrajan, Dr. Chaudhary and Dr. Zia) teach five different subjects (Zoology, Physics, Botany, Geology and History) in four universities (Delhi, Gujarat, Mumbai and Osmania), not necessarily in the same order.
(ii) Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
(iii) Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University and he teaches neither Geology nor History.
(iv) Dr. Zia teaches Physics but neither in Mumbai University nor in Osmania University.
(v) Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.
(vi) Two Professors are from Gujarat University.
(vii) One Professor teaches only one subject and in one University only.
Q. 
Who is from Osmania University?
  • a)
    Dr. Natrajan
  • b)
    Dr. Davar
  • c)
    Dr. Joshi
  • d)
    Dr. Zia
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Anaya Patel answered

(i) Five Professors (Dr. Joshi, Dr. Davar, Dr. Natrajan, Dr. Chaudhary and Dr. Zia) teach five different subjects (Zoology, Physics, Botany, Geology and History) in four universities (Delhi, Gujarat, Mumbai and Osmania), not necessarily in the same order.
(ii) Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
(iii) Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University and he teaches neither Geology nor History.
(iv) Dr. Zia teaches Physics but neither in Mumbai University nor in Osmania University.
(v) Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.
(vi) Two Professors are from Gujarat University.
(vii) One Professor teaches only one subject and in one University only.
Q. 
Which university is Dr. Zia from?
  • a)
    Gujarat
  • b)
    Mumbai
  • c)
    Delhi
  • d)
    Osmania
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Rajat Das answered
Given information:
(i) Five professors (Dr. Joshi, Dr. Davar, Dr. Natrajan, Dr. Chaudhary, and Dr. Zia) teach five different subjects (Zoology, Physics, Botany, Geology, and History) in four universities (Delhi, Gujarat, Mumbai, and Osmania).
(ii) Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
(iii) Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University and he teaches neither Geology nor History.
(iv) Dr. Zia teaches Physics but neither in Mumbai University nor in Osmania University.
(v) Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.
(vi) Two professors are from Gujarat University.
(vii) One professor teaches only one subject and in one university only.

Solution:
To determine which university Dr. Zia is from, we will analyze the given information step by step.

Step 1: Determine the subjects taught by each professor.
- Dr. Joshi teaches History.
- Dr. Davar teaches Botany.
- Dr. Natrajan does not teach Geology or History.
- Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology.
- Dr. Zia teaches Physics.

Step 2: Determine the universities associated with each subject.
- Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
- Dr. Zia does not teach in Mumbai University or Osmania University.
- Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.

Step 3: Determine the universities associated with the remaining professors.
- Dr. Davar does not teach in Mumbai University or Osmania University.
- Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University.

Step 4: Determine the universities associated with the remaining subject.
- Dr. Davar teaches Botany, but we do not know the university yet.

Step 5: Determine the universities associated with the remaining professor.
- Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University.

Step 6: Determine the universities associated with the remaining subject.
- Dr. Davar teaches Botany, but we still do not know the university yet.

Step 7: Determine the universities associated with the remaining professor.
- Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University.

Step 8: Determine the universities associated with the remaining subject.
- Dr. Davar teaches Botany in Gujarat University.

Step 9: Determine the remaining professor and subject.
- Dr. Natrajan teaches Geology in Osmania University.

Step 10: Determine the university associated with Dr. Zia.
- Since two professors are from Gujarat University and Dr. Zia teaches Physics, Dr. Zia must be from Gujarat University.

Therefore, Dr. Zia is from Gujarat University (option A).

Five Professors A, B, C, D and E residing in five different cities, teach five different subjects.
(i) A does not stay in either Bangalore or Lucknow. He teaches philosophy.
(ii) B does not stay in either Hyderabad or Lucknow. He teaches mathematics.
(iii)D stays in Jaipur and does not teach economics.
(iv) E does not stay either in Bangalore or at Delhi. He teaches geography.
(v) C does not teach history and he stays in Delhi.
Q.
Which of the following subjects does D teach?
  • a)
    Mathematics
  • b)
    Philosophy
  • c)
    Economics
  • d)
    History
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Ayush Shah answered
Understanding the Problem
To determine the subject that Professor D teaches, we need to analyze the given information step by step.
Provided Information
- A does not stay in either Bangalore or Lucknow and teaches philosophy.
- B does not stay in either Hyderabad or Lucknow and teaches mathematics.
- D stays in Jaipur and does not teach economics.
- E does not stay in either Bangalore or Delhi and teaches geography.
- C does not teach history and stays in Delhi.
Analyzing the Professors' Locations
- A: Not in Bangalore or Lucknow.
- B: Not in Hyderabad or Lucknow.
- C: In Delhi.
- D: In Jaipur.
- E: Not in Bangalore or Delhi.
From the above, we can deduce the following:
- Since C is in Delhi and does not teach history, he can teach either economics or another subject.
- A teaches philosophy and is left with the possibility of residing in either Hyderabad or Jaipur.
- B teaches mathematics and must be in a city other than Hyderabad or Lucknow, leaving only Bangalore as a possibility.
- With D in Jaipur and not teaching economics, he can only be left with history or another subject.
- E teaches geography, leaving economics or history for D.
Identifying Subjects for D
Since D does not teach economics and C cannot teach history, the only subject left for D is:
- D teaches History.
Thus, the conclusion is that D teaches history.
Final Answer
Therefore, the correct answer is option D: History.

A bowl of sweets was placed on a table to be distributed among three brothers – Rajan, Sajal and Karan. Rajan arrived first and ate what he thought was his share of sweets and left. Then, Sajal arrived. He thought that he was the first one to arrive and ate the number of sweets, he thought was his share and left. Lastly, Karan arrived. He again thought he was the first one to arrive and he took what he thought was his share. If 16 sweets are left in the bowl finally, how many sweets did the bowl contain initially?
  • a)
    27                           
  • b)
    36   
  • c)
    48                           
  • d)
    54
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Anand Menon answered
Cleary, each of the three boys ate one-third of the sweets they found in the bowl. So, let us consider the initial number of sweets to be (3 x 3 x 3) x i.e., 27x.
Then, sweets taken by Rajan 
Sweets taken by Sajal
Sweets taken by Karan
∴ 8x = 16 or x = 2.
Hence, total number of sweets in the bowl = 27x = (27 x 2) = 54.

To study more about Logical Reasoning for CLAT:

(i) Five Professors (Dr. Joshi, Dr. Davar, Dr. Natrajan, Dr. Chaudhary and Dr. Zia) teach five different subjects (Zoology, Physics, Botany, Geology and History) in four universities (Delhi, Gujarat, Mumbai and Osmania), not necessarily in the same order.
(ii) Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
(iii) Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University and he teaches neither Geology nor History.
(iv) Dr. Zia teaches Physics but neither in Mumbai University nor in Osmania University.
(v) Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.
(vi) Two Professors are from Gujarat University.
(vii) One Professor teaches only one subject and in one University only.
Q. 
Who teaches Botany?
  • a)
    Dr. Zia
  • b)
    Dr. Davar
  • c)
    Dr. Joshi
  • d)
    Dr. Natrajan
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Gayatri Dey answered

Directions: In the following questions, a statement or two are followed by two conclusions.
Statement: These apples are too expensive to be bad.
Conclusions: I. When apples are in short supply, the prices go up.
II. The higher the selling price, the superior is the quality of the commodity.
  • a)
    if conclusion I follows;
  • b)
    if conclusion II follows;
  • c)
    if both I and II follow;
  • d)
    if either I or II follows; and
  • e)
    if neither I nor II follows.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Partho Malik answered
Bold Heading: Explanation

The given statement suggests that the apples are expensive, which implies that they are of good quality. Based on this statement, we need to evaluate the given conclusions.

Conclusion I: When apples are in short supply, the prices go up.
This conclusion is not logically connected to the given statement. The statement does not provide any information or suggestion about the supply of apples. Hence, this conclusion does not follow from the given statement.

Conclusion II: The higher the selling price, the superior is the quality of the commodity.
This conclusion can be drawn from the given statement. The statement suggests that the apples are expensive, which means that they are of good quality. This conclusion asserts that the quality of a commodity is directly proportional to its selling price, which is a logical inference from the given statement. Therefore, this conclusion follows from the given statement.

Bold Heading: Answer
Hence, the correct answer is option 'B' - if conclusion II follows.

Count the number of rectangles in the given figure.
  • a)
    18
  • b)
    16
  • c)
    20
  • d)
    15
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Dia Mehta answered
The figure may be labelled as shown.
The rectangles composed of two components each are HIJE, EKJ,F, FMNG, GPQH, AEOH, EBFO, OFCG and HOGD i.e. 8 in number.
The rectangles composed of four components each are ABFH, BCGE, CDHF, DAEG and EFGH i.e. 5 in number.
The rectangles composed of six components each are IJFG, KLGH, MNHE and PQEF i.e. 4 in number.
The rectangles composed of eight components each are IJMN, KLPQ and ABCD i.e. 3 in number.
Thus, there are 8 + 5 + 4 + 3 = 20 rectangles in the given figure. (Here note that the squares are also counted amongst rectangles)

Directions for Questions 19 – 21: The questions in this section are based on the reasoning contained in brief statements or passages. For some questions, more than one of the choices could conceivably answer the question. However, you are to choose the best answer.
Q.
Millions of female bats rear their pups in Bracken Cave. Although the mothers all leave the cave nightly, on their return each mother is almost always swiftly reunited with her own pup. Since the bats calls are their only means of finding one another, and a bat pup cannot distinguish the call of its mother from that of any other adult bat, it is clear that each mother bat can recognize the call of her pup.
The argument seeks to do which one of the following?
  • a)
    Derive a general conclusion about all members of a group from facts known about representative members of that group
  • b)
    Establish the validity of one explanation for a phenomenon by excluding alternative explanations
  • c)
    Support, by describing a suitable mechanism, the hypothesis that a certain phenomenon can occur.
  • d)
    Conclude that members of two groups are likely to share a certain ability because of other characteristics they share
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Eshaan Kapoor answered
Answer choice (A) Since the argument does not involve comparison between a sample and a population, it is unlikely that the argument generalizes from a small group, and this choice is wrong. Furthermore, this choice can be seen as somewhat contradictory, as pups seem different from the mothers.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. The argument attempts to arrive at a final explanation by eliminating options.
Answer choice (C) Since the argument does not describe the mechanism by which mothers use calls to locate their pups, this choice is wrong.
Answer choice (D) Since the argument implies that the pups and mothers may be different in their ability to distinguish calls, it does not follow that argument makes conclusions based on similarities.

Someone who gets sick from eating a meal will often develop a strong distaste for the one food in the meal that had the most distinctive flavor, whether or not that food caused the sickness. This phenomenon explains why children are especially likely to develop strong aversion to some foods.
Which one of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the explanation?
  • a)
    Children are more likely than adults to be given meals composed of foods lacking especially distinctive flavours.
  • b)
    Children are less likely than adults to see a connection between their health and the foods they eat.
  • c)
    Children tend to have more acute taste and to become sick more often than adults do.
  • d)
    Children typically recover more slowly than adults do from sickness caused by food.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Aspire Academy answered
Answer Choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect because if actually weakens the argument. If children are more likely to get food without distinctive flavor, they are less likely to develop aversions.
Answer Choice (B): This answer choice is incorrect because it is entirely unrelated to the stimulus. If anything, this answer offers another reason for children to develop aversions: they don't see the health benefits of some foods so they go by taste alone.
Answer Choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. It fills in the gap that the stimulus is missing. Children tend to have more acute taste and become sick, which connects the element in the premise, sickness, with the new element in the conclusion, children. If children are more likely to become sick, they are more likely to develop distaste, based on the premise.
Answer Choice (D): This answer choice is incorrect because it is dealing with recovering from sickness, which has nothing to do with actually getting sick or developing a distaste for food.

Directions: In the following questions, a statement or two are followed by two conclusions.
Statement: The doctors nurse only those bleeding wounds which are caused by bullets. A patient X was bleeding profusely.
Conclusions: I. X was nursed by the doctors.
II. The doctors did not nurse X.
  • a)
    if conclusion I follows;
  • b)
    if conclusion II follows;
  • c)
    if both I and II follow;
  • d)
    if neither I nor II follows.
  • e)
    if either I or II follows
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Vinita Chakraborty answered
Understanding the Statement
The statement indicates a specific condition under which doctors will nurse patients:
- Doctors only nurse bleeding wounds caused by bullets.
This means that if a wound is not caused by a bullet, the doctors will not provide nursing.
Analyzing the Patient's Condition
- Patient X is described as "bleeding profusely." However, the statement does not provide any information about the cause of X's bleeding.
Evaluating the Conclusions
1. Conclusion I: X was nursed by the doctors.
- There is no information indicating that X's bleeding is due to a bullet wound. Therefore, we cannot conclude that X was nursed by the doctors. This conclusion does not follow.
2. Conclusion II: The doctors did not nurse X.
- While it is possible that the doctors did not nurse X, we cannot definitively conclude this either because we do not know the cause of X's bleeding. Thus, this conclusion also does not follow.
Final Evaluation
Since neither conclusion I nor conclusion II can be definitively deduced from the statement, the correct answer is:
- Option D: Neither I nor II follows.
This highlights the importance of understanding the implications of a statement and the necessity of having sufficient information to draw conclusions.

In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the statement.
Statements: In a recent survey report, it has been stated that those who undertake physical exercise for at least half an hour a day are less prone to have any heart ailments
Conclusions:
I. Moderate level of physical exercise is necessary for leading a healthy life
II. All people who do desk-bound jobs definitely suffer from heart ailments
  • a)
    Only conclusion I follows
  • b)
    Only conclusion II follows
  • c)
    Either I or II follows
  • d)
    Neither I nor II follows
  • e)
    Both I and II follow
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Varsha Singh answered
Statement: In a recent survey report, it has been stated that those who undertake physical exercise for at least half an hour a day are less prone to have any heart ailments.

Conclusion I: Moderate level of physical exercise is necessary for leading a healthy life.
Conclusion II: All people who do desk-bound jobs definitely suffer from heart ailments.

Explanation:
Conclusion I: Moderate level of physical exercise is necessary for leading a healthy life.
This conclusion can be logically inferred from the given statement. The survey report states that those who undertake physical exercise for at least half an hour a day are less prone to have any heart ailments. This implies that physical exercise is beneficial for maintaining a healthy heart. It is reasonable to conclude that a moderate level of physical exercise is necessary for leading a healthy life, as it helps in preventing heart ailments.

Conclusion II: All people who do desk-bound jobs definitely suffer from heart ailments.
This conclusion cannot be logically inferred from the given statement. The survey report does not provide any information about people who do desk-bound jobs or their likelihood of suffering from heart ailments. It only states that those who undertake physical exercise for at least half an hour a day are less prone to have any heart ailments. Therefore, it is not reasonable to conclude that all people who do desk-bound jobs definitely suffer from heart ailments based on the given information.

Conclusion:
Based on the above explanation, only Conclusion I follows from the given statement, while Conclusion II does not. Therefore, the correct answer is option A) Only conclusion I follows.

Directions: In the following questions, a statement or two are followed by two conclusions.
Statement: The oceans are a storehouse of practically every mineral, including uranium. But, like most other minerals, it is found in extremely low concentrations - about three grams for 1000 tonnes of water.
Conclusions: I. Sea water contains gold.
II. The oceans harbour radiation hazards.
  • a)
    if conclusion I follows;
  • b)
    if conclusion II follows;
  • c)
    if both I and II follow;
  • d)
    if either I or II follows; and
  • e)
    if neither I nor II follows.
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?

Eshaan Kapoor answered
Neither of the conclusions can be said to definitely follow. ‘Practically every mineral’ does not mean ‘every mineral’ and hence gold may or may not be there. Similarly, a uranium content of 3 grams per 1000 tonnes of water may or may not harbour radiation hazard.

Directions: In the following questions, a statement or two are followed by two conclusions.
Statement: Of all the television sets manufactured in India, the ‘solar’ brand has the largest sale.
Conclusions: I. The volume of sales of all the brands of television sets manufactured in India is known.
II. The production of no other television set in India is as large as that of ‘solar’.
  • a)
    if conclusion I follows;
  • b)
    if conclusion II follows;
  • c)
    if both I and II follow;
  • d)
    if either I or II follows; and
  • e)
    if neither I nor II follows.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Eshaan Kapoor answered
The first conclusion is obviously true; otherwise how could one know that the brand has the largest sale? The second speaks of ‘production’ and not ‘sale’, and hence it is not certain.

Directions (28–31): Read the following information carefully and answer the questions given below:
(i) Five Professors (Dr. Joshi, Dr. Davar, Dr. Natrajan, Dr. Chaudhary and Dr. Zia) teach five different subjects (Zoology, Physics, Botany, Geology and History) in four universities (Delhi, Gujarat, Mumbai and Osmania), not necessarily in the same order.
(ii) Dr. Chaudhary teaches Zoology in Mumbai University.
(iii) Dr. Natrajan is neither in Osmania University nor in Delhi University and he teaches neither Geology nor History.
(iv) Dr. Zia teaches Physics but neither in Mumbai University nor in Osmania University.
(v) Dr. Joshi teaches History in Delhi University.
(vi) Two Professors are from Gujarat University.
(vii) One Professor teaches only one subject and in one University only.
Q. 
Who teaches Geology?
  • a)
    Dr. Natrajan
  • b)
    Dr. Zia
  • c)
    Dr. Davar
  • d)
    Dr. Joshi
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Krithika Patel answered

Chapter doubts & questions for Passage Based for Practice - 4 Months Preparation Course 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 Passage Based for Practice - 4 Months Preparation Course 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.

4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG

283 videos|1003 docs|331 tests

Top Courses CLAT

Related CLAT Content

© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup