NABARD Practice Test - 7 - Bank Exams MCQ

Directions

Study the following information carefully and answer the following given questions:

Linda, Mishti, Pinky, Gauri, Annie, Dolly, Alia and Tripti are eight friends all of whom have different weights. They are standing in two rows of four girls each, with four facing the North direction and four facing South,

(i) Tripti is lighter than Linda.

(ii) The heaviest girl among the eight is neither standing at any of the ends nor facing North.

(iii) Annie is lighter than Mishti and is facing South.

(iv) Gauri is the lightest among the eight girls and is standing directly opposite Dolly who is facing South.

(v) Alia is heavier than Pinky but lighter than Tripti.

(vi) Linda is standing at the second position to the right of Alia.

(vii) Dolly is lighter than only two girls, Annie and Mishti.

(viii) Tripti is standing directly opposite Pinky who is facing South.

(ix) Alia is standing at the third position to the left of Gauri.

Q. Who is sitting exactly opposite to Alia?

Directions

Study the following information carefully and answer the following given questions:

Linda, Mishti, Pinky, Gauri, Annie, Dolly, Alia and Tripti are eight friends all of whom have different weights. They are standing in two rows of four girls each, with four facing the North direction and four facing South,

(i) Tripti is lighter than Linda.

(ii) The heaviest girl among the eight is neither standing at any of the ends nor facing North.

(iii) Annie is lighter than Mishti and is facing South.

(iv) Gauri is the lightest among the eight girls and is standing directly opposite Dolly who is facing South.

(v) Alia is heavier than Pinky but lighter than Tripti.

(vi) Linda is standing at the second position to the right of Alia.

(vii) Dolly is lighter than only two girls, Annie and Mishti.

(viii) Tripti is standing directly opposite Pinky who is facing South.

(ix) Alia is standing at the third position to the left of Gauri.

Q. Who is sitting second to left of Pinky?

Pointing to a photograph of Pankaj, Tarun said. "The mother of his sister is the wife of my wife's father". How is Tarun related to Pankaj?

Aman is 16^th from the left end in a row of boys and Vivek is 18^th from the right end. Gagan is 11^th from Aman towards the right and 3^rd from Vivek towards the right end. How many boys are there in the row?

In a certain code language, SHIRT is coded as RGGSU and HOUSE is coded as GNSTF. In the same code language, how will PRINT be coded as?

If the first and second letters in the word ‘INFRASTRUCTURE’ were interchanged, also the third and fourth letters, the fifth and sixth letters, and so on. Which letter would be the eighth letter counting from your right?

Directions

The following questions are accompanied by three statement I, II and III. you have to determine which statement (s) is /are necessary/ sufficient to answer the question. 

John, Kanu, Luv, Manu, Nanu and Omi are sitting around a circular table and all of them are facing the centre. Who sits exactly between John and Luv?

I. John is facing Kanu, and Luv is facing Omi, who is on the immediate right of John.

II. Nanu is on the immediate right of Luv, who is not an immediate neighbour of John. Manu is an immediate neighbour of Kanu and Omi.

III. Manu is facing Nanu, and Luv is facing Omi. Luv is on the immediate left of Manu and second to the left of John, who is sitting adjacent to Manu.

Directions

The following questions are accompanied by three statement I, II and III. you have to determine which statement (s) is /are necessary/ sufficient to answer the question. 

In a family of seven members, how is O related to B?

I.D and M are children of N, who is wife O

II. X is brother of Y, Who is daughter of D.

III. B is the only brother-in-law of X, who is a bachelor

Directions

The following questions are accompanied by three statement I, II and III. you have to determine which statement (s) is /are necessary/ sufficient to answer the question. 

Among Five persons P, Q, R, U and V, P is in which direction with respect to V?

I. P is to the west of U and to the south of R. R is to the west of V.

II. Q is to the west of R and southeast of U, who is to the north of P. U is to east of V

III. V is to the south of U and North of Q, who is to the West of P.

Directions

Study the following information and answer the given question.

Each of the six stores A, B, C, D, E and F sold different number of books in one day. Only three stores sold less books than F. A sold more books than C. E did not sell the highest number of books. D sold more books than C and A but less than F. The store which sold the second highest number of books sold 84 books.

Q. How many books did B probably sell?

Directions

Study the following information and answer the given question.

Each of the six stores A, B, C, D, E and F sold different number of books in one day. Only three stores sold less books than F. A sold more books than C. E did not sell the highest number of books. D sold more books than C and A but less than F. The store which sold the second highest number of books sold 84 books.

Q. Which of the following stores sold the second lowest number of books?

Directions

Study the following information and answer the given question.

Each of the six stores A, B, C, D, E and F sold different number of books in one day. Only three stores sold less books than F. A sold more books than C. E did not sell the highest number of books. D sold more books than C and A but less than F. The store which sold the second highest number of books sold 84 books.

Q. If the total number of books sold by A and E is 130, then how many books did A sell?

A person starts from Point A, walks 20m towards south and reaches Point B. He then takes a right turn and walks 6m then takes a right turn, and walks for 5m. He then takes a right turn and walks 6m. He takes a final left turn, walks a certain distance and reaches Point R. Point R is 14m to the north of Point B. What is the distance between Point A and Point R?

Find the next term in the series:  CNP, FPR, IRT, ?

Directions

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 with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.

Q. Statements:       Some racks are tables.

                                Some tables are chairs.

                                No chair is a book.

Conclusions:       I. Some racks are chairs.

                                II. All tables being racks is a possibility.

                                III. No book is a chair.

Directions

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 with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.

Q. Statements:       Some trucks are buses.

                                All buses are cars.

                                All cars are bikes.

Conclusions:       I. Some trucks are bikes.

                                II. Some cars are buses.

                                III. Some trucks are cars.

Directions

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 with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts.

Q. Statements:       Some songs are music.

                                All music are composers.

                                Some composers are lyrics.

Conclusions:       I. Some songs are not lyrics.

                                II. All music may be songs.

                                III. Some songs are lyrics.

Directions

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

While opposition and dissent is the lifeblood of any democracy, this is useful if it is based on some coherent arguments and cogent reasoning, instead of being merely reactive, or worse, reactionary. While there is absolutely nothing wrong in making digs and taking swipes at the ruling dispensation – it adds colour to politics – on substantive issues, the criticism and opposition to government action (or inaction) and policy should be aimed at bettering things rather than making them worse. But instead of coming up with better alternatives, what is being offered is opposition for the sake of opposition of any and every decision of the government and of anything that the government does or doesn’t do. Even though the government has given many openings and opportunities to the opposition to pin it on the mat, the opposition hasn’t really managed to marshal its arguments effectively. One reason for this is that the opposition’s argument and goalpost keep shifting and loses its salience.

In the field of economics, which is fast turning out to be something of an Achilles heel for this government, the criticism is mostly misplaced, and not based on policy but on politics. For instance, there was a huge uproar over rising petroleum prices. Reams were written and hours of airtime spent in informing people of the quantum of taxes levied on petroleum products.  Besides the fact that these taxes have been there forever and were not introduced by this government, it was quite a spectacle to see how the very people who raised hell over the rising prices, switched tack and started clobbering the government for cutting some taxes and indulging in cheap populism to bring down the prices of petroleum. The same trend was visible on the GST issue.

That GST is anything but a simple tax and has become a millstone around the neck of many an economic agent is well known. But the responsibility for the way in which this tax has been rolled out has to be borne by the entire political spectrum which is present in the GST council. Be that as it may, the government was severely chastised for not responding to the problems faced by the traders and small businesses. It was accused of being insensitive and callous to the sufferings of millions of Indians. But when the government responded and gave relief, it was again disparaged. If the government takes initiatives to promote industry, it is accused of playing into the hands of and working for corporates; when it ignores corporates and their bottom lines start falling and layoffs start rising, the government is accused of ignoring the economy.

Clearly, as far as its detractors are concerned, the current dispensation is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. The problem with this zero-sum approach is that very often even if the criticism of government policy and action is valid, the perception is that it is just opposition for the sake of opposition and there is neither any sense nor any sensibility in the criticism. It would probably make more sense for the opposition to take credit for any change in tack by the government in response to its clamour rather than swing to the other side and criticise the government for doing what it was asking it to do, and in the process compromising its own credibility. But doing this would mean changing the political paradigm in India, something that no politician really wants. After all, it is so much easier to ride to power by demonising your rivals, cementing your vote banks, mouthing seductive populist political slogans that are impractical, instead of doing the difficult job of worsting your rivals by presenting with solid alternative policies that will deliver on the ground.

Q. According to the passage, what is the reasoning behind the inability of the opposition to usher its arguments effectively?

Directions

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

While opposition and dissent is the lifeblood of any democracy, this is useful if it is based on some coherent arguments and cogent reasoning, instead of being merely reactive, or worse, reactionary. While there is absolutely nothing wrong in making digs and taking swipes at the ruling dispensation – it adds colour to politics – on substantive issues, the criticism and opposition to government action (or inaction) and policy should be aimed at bettering things rather than making them worse. But instead of coming up with better alternatives, what is being offered is opposition for the sake of opposition of any and every decision of the government and of anything that the government does or doesn’t do. Even though the government has given many openings and opportunities to the opposition to pin it on the mat, the opposition hasn’t really managed to marshal its arguments effectively. One reason for this is that the opposition’s argument and goalpost keep shifting and loses its salience.

In the field of economics, which is fast turning out to be something of an Achilles heel for this government, the criticism is mostly misplaced, and not based on policy but on politics. For instance, there was a huge uproar over rising petroleum prices. Reams were written and hours of airtime spent in informing people of the quantum of taxes levied on petroleum products.  Besides the fact that these taxes have been there forever and were not introduced by this government, it was quite a spectacle to see how the very people who raised hell over the rising prices, switched tack and started clobbering the government for cutting some taxes and indulging in cheap populism to bring down the prices of petroleum. The same trend was visible on the GST issue.

That GST is anything but a simple tax and has become a millstone around the neck of many an economic agent is well known. But the responsibility for the way in which this tax has been rolled out has to be borne by the entire political spectrum which is present in the GST council. Be that as it may, the government was severely chastised for not responding to the problems faced by the traders and small businesses. It was accused of being insensitive and callous to the sufferings of millions of Indians. But when the government responded and gave relief, it was again disparaged. If the government takes initiatives to promote industry, it is accused of playing into the hands of and working for corporates; when it ignores corporates and their bottom lines start falling and layoffs start rising, the government is accused of ignoring the economy.

Clearly, as far as its detractors are concerned, the current dispensation is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. The problem with this zero-sum approach is that very often even if the criticism of government policy and action is valid, the perception is that it is just opposition for the sake of opposition and there is neither any sense nor any sensibility in the criticism. It would probably make more sense for the opposition to take credit for any change in tack by the government in response to its clamour rather than swing to the other side and criticise the government for doing what it was asking it to do, and in the process compromising its own credibility. But doing this would mean changing the political paradigm in India, something that no politician really wants. After all, it is so much easier to ride to power by demonising your rivals, cementing your vote banks, mouthing seductive populist political slogans that are impractical, instead of doing the difficult job of worsting your rivals by presenting with solid alternative policies that will deliver on the ground.

Q. Find the incorrect statement according to the passage.

Directions

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

While opposition and dissent is the lifeblood of any democracy, this is useful if it is based on some coherent arguments and cogent reasoning, instead of being merely reactive, or worse, reactionary. While there is absolutely nothing wrong in making digs and taking swipes at the ruling dispensation – it adds colour to politics – on substantive issues, the criticism and opposition to government action (or inaction) and policy should be aimed at bettering things rather than making them worse. But instead of coming up with better alternatives, what is being offered is opposition for the sake of opposition of any and every decision of the government and of anything that the government does or doesn’t do. Even though the government has given many openings and opportunities to the opposition to pin it on the mat, the opposition hasn’t really managed to marshal its arguments effectively. One reason for this is that the opposition’s argument and goalpost keep shifting and loses its salience.

In the field of economics, which is fast turning out to be something of an Achilles heel for this government, the criticism is mostly misplaced, and not based on policy but on politics. For instance, there was a huge uproar over rising petroleum prices. Reams were written and hours of airtime spent in informing people of the quantum of taxes levied on petroleum products.  Besides the fact that these taxes have been there forever and were not introduced by this government, it was quite a spectacle to see how the very people who raised hell over the rising prices, switched tack and started clobbering the government for cutting some taxes and indulging in cheap populism to bring down the prices of petroleum. The same trend was visible on the GST issue.

That GST is anything but a simple tax and has become a millstone around the neck of many an economic agent is well known. But the responsibility for the way in which this tax has been rolled out has to be borne by the entire political spectrum which is present in the GST council. Be that as it may, the government was severely chastised for not responding to the problems faced by the traders and small businesses. It was accused of being insensitive and callous to the sufferings of millions of Indians. But when the government responded and gave relief, it was again disparaged. If the government takes initiatives to promote industry, it is accused of playing into the hands of and working for corporates; when it ignores corporates and their bottom lines start falling and layoffs start rising, the government is accused of ignoring the economy.

Clearly, as far as its detractors are concerned, the current dispensation is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. The problem with this zero-sum approach is that very often even if the criticism of government policy and action is valid, the perception is that it is just opposition for the sake of opposition and there is neither any sense nor any sensibility in the criticism. It would probably make more sense for the opposition to take credit for any change in tack by the government in response to its clamour rather than swing to the other side and criticise the government for doing what it was asking it to do, and in the process compromising its own credibility. But doing this would mean changing the political paradigm in India, something that no politician really wants. After all, it is so much easier to ride to power by demonising your rivals, cementing your vote banks, mouthing seductive populist political slogans that are impractical, instead of doing the difficult job of worsting your rivals by presenting with solid alternative policies that will deliver on the ground.

Q. What, according to the passage, was the government accused of in relation to the GST?

I. For not helping the renowned businessmen in boosting the economy

II. For being insensitive towards the citizens

III. For not paying attention to the economy

Directions

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

While opposition and dissent is the lifeblood of any democracy, this is useful if it is based on some coherent arguments and cogent reasoning, instead of being merely reactive, or worse, reactionary. While there is absolutely nothing wrong in making digs and taking swipes at the ruling dispensation – it adds colour to politics – on substantive issues, the criticism and opposition to government action (or inaction) and policy should be aimed at bettering things rather than making them worse. But instead of coming up with better alternatives, what is being offered is opposition for the sake of opposition of any and every decision of the government and of anything that the government does or doesn’t do. Even though the government has given many openings and opportunities to the opposition to pin it on the mat, the opposition hasn’t really managed to marshal its arguments effectively. One reason for this is that the opposition’s argument and goalpost keep shifting and loses its salience.

In the field of economics, which is fast turning out to be something of an Achilles heel for this government, the criticism is mostly misplaced, and not based on policy but on politics. For instance, there was a huge uproar over rising petroleum prices. Reams were written and hours of airtime spent in informing people of the quantum of taxes levied on petroleum products.  Besides the fact that these taxes have been there forever and were not introduced by this government, it was quite a spectacle to see how the very people who raised hell over the rising prices, switched tack and started clobbering the government for cutting some taxes and indulging in cheap populism to bring down the prices of petroleum. The same trend was visible on the GST issue.

That GST is anything but a simple tax and has become a millstone around the neck of many an economic agent is well known. But the responsibility for the way in which this tax has been rolled out has to be borne by the entire political spectrum which is present in the GST council. Be that as it may, the government was severely chastised for not responding to the problems faced by the traders and small businesses. It was accused of being insensitive and callous to the sufferings of millions of Indians. But when the government responded and gave relief, it was again disparaged. If the government takes initiatives to promote industry, it is accused of playing into the hands of and working for corporates; when it ignores corporates and their bottom lines start falling and layoffs start rising, the government is accused of ignoring the economy.

Clearly, as far as its detractors are concerned, the current dispensation is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. The problem with this zero-sum approach is that very often even if the criticism of government policy and action is valid, the perception is that it is just opposition for the sake of opposition and there is neither any sense nor any sensibility in the criticism. It would probably make more sense for the opposition to take credit for any change in tack by the government in response to its clamour rather than swing to the other side and criticise the government for doing what it was asking it to do, and in the process compromising its own credibility. But doing this would mean changing the political paradigm in India, something that no politician really wants. After all, it is so much easier to ride to power by demonising your rivals, cementing your vote banks, mouthing seductive populist political slogans that are impractical, instead of doing the difficult job of worsting your rivals by presenting with solid alternative policies that will deliver on the ground.

Q. What message does the author want to convey through the passage?

Directions

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

While opposition and dissent is the lifeblood of any democracy, this is useful if it is based on some coherent arguments and cogent reasoning, instead of being merely reactive, or worse, reactionary. While there is absolutely nothing wrong in making digs and taking swipes at the ruling dispensation – it adds colour to politics – on substantive issues, the criticism and opposition to government action (or inaction) and policy should be aimed at bettering things rather than making them worse. But instead of coming up with better alternatives, what is being offered is opposition for the sake of opposition of any and every decision of the government and of anything that the government does or doesn’t do. Even though the government has given many openings and opportunities to the opposition to pin it on the mat, the opposition hasn’t really managed to marshal its arguments effectively. One reason for this is that the opposition’s argument and goalpost keep shifting and loses its salience.

In the field of economics, which is fast turning out to be something of an Achilles heel for this government, the criticism is mostly misplaced, and not based on policy but on politics. For instance, there was a huge uproar over rising petroleum prices. Reams were written and hours of airtime spent in informing people of the quantum of taxes levied on petroleum products.  Besides the fact that these taxes have been there forever and were not introduced by this government, it was quite a spectacle to see how the very people who raised hell over the rising prices, switched tack and started clobbering the government for cutting some taxes and indulging in cheap populism to bring down the prices of petroleum. The same trend was visible on the GST issue.

That GST is anything but a simple tax and has become a millstone around the neck of many an economic agent is well known. But the responsibility for the way in which this tax has been rolled out has to be borne by the entire political spectrum which is present in the GST council. Be that as it may, the government was severely chastised for not responding to the problems faced by the traders and small businesses. It was accused of being insensitive and callous to the sufferings of millions of Indians. But when the government responded and gave relief, it was again disparaged. If the government takes initiatives to promote industry, it is accused of playing into the hands of and working for corporates; when it ignores corporates and their bottom lines start falling and layoffs start rising, the government is accused of ignoring the economy.

Clearly, as far as its detractors are concerned, the current dispensation is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. The problem with this zero-sum approach is that very often even if the criticism of government policy and action is valid, the perception is that it is just opposition for the sake of opposition and there is neither any sense nor any sensibility in the criticism. It would probably make more sense for the opposition to take credit for any change in tack by the government in response to its clamour rather than swing to the other side and criticise the government for doing what it was asking it to do, and in the process compromising its own credibility. But doing this would mean changing the political paradigm in India, something that no politician really wants. After all, it is so much easier to ride to power by demonising your rivals, cementing your vote banks, mouthing seductive populist political slogans that are impractical, instead of doing the difficult job of worsting your rivals by presenting with solid alternative policies that will deliver on the ground.

Q. What is the ‘zero-sum approach’ referred to in the passage? 

Directions

In the following passage there are blanks, each of which has been numbered. These numbers are printed below the passage and against each five words are suggested, one of which fits the blank appropriately.

The structure of the delta is much ______26_______ that of the Bay of Bengal, but many have dubbed the formation of the delta a fluke of Nature. About two million years___27____, the original route of the Okavango River ended in a lake that is now the salt pans of the Makgadikgadi. Then about 50,000 years ago, a monumental earthquake in Southern Africa _____28_______ a seismic flow disruption for the river, forming the 15,000 square-kilometre wetland ___29___ 11 trillion litres of water. So geologically speaking, the delta is quite young, but has also ______30_______ lifetimes of species thrive and wither.

Q. Find out the appropriate word in each case.

Directions

In the following passage there are blanks, each of which has been numbered. These numbers are printed below the passage and against each five words are suggested, one of which fits the blank appropriately.

The structure of the delta is much ______26_______ that of the Bay of Bengal, but many have dubbed the formation of the delta a fluke of Nature. About two million years___27____, the original route of the Okavango River ended in a lake that is now the salt pans of the Makgadikgadi. Then about 50,000 years ago, a monumental earthquake in Southern Africa _____28_______ a seismic flow disruption for the river, forming the 15,000 square-kilometre wetland ___29___ 11 trillion litres of water. So geologically speaking, the delta is quite young, but has also ______30_______ lifetimes of species thrive and wither.

Q. Find out the appropriate word in each case.

Directions

In the following passage there are blanks, each of which has been numbered. These numbers are printed below the passage and against each five words are suggested, one of which fits the blank appropriately.

The structure of the delta is much ______26_______ that of the Bay of Bengal, but many have dubbed the formation of the delta a fluke of Nature. About two million years___27____, the original route of the Okavango River ended in a lake that is now the salt pans of the Makgadikgadi. Then about 50,000 years ago, a monumental earthquake in Southern Africa _____28_______ a seismic flow disruption for the river, forming the 15,000 square-kilometre wetland ___29___ 11 trillion litres of water. So geologically speaking, the delta is quite young, but has also ______30_______ lifetimes of species thrive and wither.

Q. Find out the appropriate word in each case.

Directions

In the following passage there are blanks, each of which has been numbered. These numbers are printed below the passage and against each five words are suggested, one of which fits the blank appropriately.

The structure of the delta is much ______26_______ that of the Bay of Bengal, but many have dubbed the formation of the delta a fluke of Nature. About two million years___27____, the original route of the Okavango River ended in a lake that is now the salt pans of the Makgadikgadi. Then about 50,000 years ago, a monumental earthquake in Southern Africa _____28_______ a seismic flow disruption for the river, forming the 15,000 square-kilometre wetland ___29___ 11 trillion litres of water. So geologically speaking, the delta is quite young, but has also ______30_______ lifetimes of species thrive and wither.

Q. Find out the appropriate word in each case.

Directions

In the following passage there are blanks, each of which has been numbered. These numbers are printed below the passage and against each five words are suggested, one of which fits the blank appropriately.

The structure of the delta is much ______26_______ that of the Bay of Bengal, but many have dubbed the formation of the delta a fluke of Nature. About two million years___27____, the original route of the Okavango River ended in a lake that is now the salt pans of the Makgadikgadi. Then about 50,000 years ago, a monumental earthquake in Southern Africa _____28_______ a seismic flow disruption for the river, forming the 15,000 square-kilometre wetland ___29___ 11 trillion litres of water. So geologically speaking, the delta is quite young, but has also ______30_______ lifetimes of species thrive and wither.

Q. Find out the appropriate word in each case.