CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Directions: In this question below is given ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
Passage
India has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.
This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.
India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.
  • a)
    if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;
  • b)
    if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;
  • c)
    if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;
  • d)
    if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; and
  • e)
    if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by sev...
Probably true. There has been no mention of any such conditions. But common sense tells us that this must be true.
Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by sev...
Explanation:

Given Facts:
- India has signed agreements with the USA and the EC for Market Access Conciliations in textiles.
- More than two-thirds of India's total textile exports go to the USA and EU countries.
- The agreements provide significant market access for Indian textile products in the USA and EU markets.
- The agreements are expected to boost handloom and powerloom production and exports, which are crucial for employment generation.

Analysis:
- The passage mentions that the agreements aim to facilitate trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU.
- It does not explicitly state that India will have to adhere to specific quality standards to continue receiving export orders.
- However, given the nature of international trade agreements and the emphasis on market access and boosting production, it is reasonable to infer that maintaining quality standards could be a requirement for India to sustain its export orders from these countries.

Conclusion:
- The inference that India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from the USA and EU is 'probably true' based on the context provided in the passage.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The government and the Opposition are headed on a collision course in the Budget session of Parliament, with the latter planning to move a joint motion demanding a repeal of the three laws that are agitating farmers in much of the country. The confrontation over these laws is a legacy of the last session when they were passed without detailed and proper consultation with political parties, experts and farmer representatives. The session began with around 20 Opposition parties boycotting the President’s address to a joint sitting of Parliament. BSP President Mayawati belatedly announced her party’s decision to also stay away as a mark of protest. The delay clearly outlined her intention to keep a distance from the Opposition bloc, which among others has the Congress and the Samajwadi Party. The boycott indicated a worsening of the relationship between the government and the Opposition. In January 2020, the Opposition had attended the President’s address wearing black bands. The last time the Opposition boycotted the President’s Address was in November 2019 to commemorate the Constitution Day. President Ram Nath Kovind said the government would keep the farm Bills on hold as per a Supreme Court directive but did not indicate any rethink.The government has advantages over the Opposition, in terms of the numerical strength in both Houses of Parliament. With the Tamil Nadu and West Bengal Assembly elections round the corner, two key Opposition parties, the DMK and the Trinamool Congress, are expected to be largely absent, further reducing the Opposition’s strength. The Opposition, despite its united front on the first day of the session, has a record of disintegrating in the face of the BJP’s manoeuvring in previous sessions. There will be discussion on the Motion of Thanks to the President and later on the Budget. As of now there are no indications of the Opposition skipping these events. In legislative business, recent ordinances such as the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, which has provisions to deal with domestic and international arbitration and defines the law for conducting conciliation proceedings, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2021, which is for merging the J&K cadre of All India Services Officers such as the IAS, IPS and the Indian Forest Service with the Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram Union Territory (AGMUT) cadre, will have to get a parliamentary nod. The government draws its legitimacy from a parliamentary majority, but democratic conduct is more than enforcing the will of the majority. The government’s conduct in Parliament and outside, where its critics are facing the strong arm of the state machinery, should meet the high standards India has set for itself as a democracy.Q. Which of the following is not consistent with the passage?

The government and the Opposition are headed on a collision course in the Budget session of Parliament, with the latter planning to move a joint motion demanding a repeal of the three laws that are agitating farmers in much of the country. The confrontation over these laws is a legacy of the last session when they were passed without detailed and proper consultation with political parties, experts and farmer representatives. The session began with around 20 Opposition parties boycotting the President’s address to a joint sitting of Parliament. BSP President Mayawati belatedly announced her party’s decision to also stay away as a mark of protest. The delay clearly outlined her intention to keep a distance from the Opposition bloc, which among others has the Congress and the Samajwadi Party. The boycott indicated a worsening of the relationship between the government and the Opposition. In January 2020, the Opposition had attended the President’s address wearing black bands. The last time the Opposition boycotted the President’s Address was in November 2019 to commemorate the Constitution Day. President Ram Nath Kovind said the government would keep the farm Bills on hold as per a Supreme Court directive but did not indicate any rethink.The government has advantages over the Opposition, in terms of the numerical strength in both Houses of Parliament. With the Tamil Nadu and West Bengal Assembly elections round the corner, two key Opposition parties, the DMK and the Trinamool Congress, are expected to be largely absent, further reducing the Opposition’s strength. The Opposition, despite its united front on the first day of the session, has a record of disintegrating in the face of the BJP’s manoeuvring in previous sessions. There will be discussion on the Motion of Thanks to the President and later on the Budget. As of now there are no indications of the Opposition skipping these events. In legislative business, recent ordinances such as the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, which has provisions to deal with domestic and international arbitration and defines the law for conducting conciliation proceedings, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2021, which is for merging the J&K cadre of All India Services Officers such as the IAS, IPS and the Indian Forest Service with the Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram Union Territory (AGMUT) cadre, will have to get a parliamentary nod. The government draws its legitimacy from a parliamentary majority, but democratic conduct is more than enforcing the will of the majority. The government’s conduct in Parliament and outside, where its critics are facing the strong arm of the state machinery, should meet the high standards India has set for itself as a democracy.Q. Which of the following is true regarding democracy according to the author?

The primary objective of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, (“MSME Act”) is to facilitate the promotion and development and enhance the competitiveness of micro, small and medium enterprises. The MSME Act contains provisions for dispute resolution which are applicable to disputes involving suppliers. Section 18 of the MSME Act provides that any party with a dispute regarding amount due to a Supplier may make a reference to the MSME Facilitation Council (“Council”) for conciliation. If conciliation is unsuccessful, the Council may either take up the dispute itself for arbitration or refer the parties to an arbitral institution. Section 18(4) further provides that the Council or center providing the alternative dispute resolution services shall have jurisdiction to act as an arbitrator or conciliator in a dispute between the Supplier located within its jurisdiction and a buyer located anywhere in India.Section 18 became contentious when multiple cases arose where a party involved in a dispute with a Supplier filed proceedings in court challenging its applicability to their dispute in light of the arbitration agreement entered between the parties. In general, presence of an arbitration agreement would not invalidate arbitration proceedings that have been initiated under the MSME Act, since the MSME Act is a special statute which would override any agreement between the parties. This position was also upheld by the Supreme Court. However, in those cases, the Supplier had initiated proceedings under section 18 of the MSME Act before the Buyer invoked arbitration under the agreement. These cases did not deal with a scenario where the Buyer invoked arbitration under the agreement where there was no reference of a dispute to the Council. For such situations, it has been held that, if the intention of section 18(4) of the MSME Act was to create a legal bar on a party who has a contract with a Supplier under the MSME Act from invoking section 11 of the Arbitration Act, then the legislature would have expressly provided that the MSME Act overrides any arbitration agreement entered under the MSME Act. Section 18(4) would come into play only in cases where a reference was made to the Council under section 18(1). The Court noted the use of the word “may” in section 18(1) and held that in light of the language used, it cannot be said to be mandatory for a Buyer to refer its dispute to the Council under section 18. Since the jurisdiction of the Council had not yet been invoked, there was nothing barring the court from appointing an arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement between the parties.By making section 18 of the MSME Act directory, Buyers have been given a way out to circumvent the provisions under the MSME Act.Q. Porwal Sales, the Buyer in this case, filed an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act for appointment of an arbitral tribunal under an arbitration agreement between the parties. One of the objections raised by Flame Control Industries was that since it was a supplier within the meaning of the MSME Act, and in light of section 18(4), the jurisdiction of the court to entertain an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act would be ousted. On the reading of the passage, determine whether the pleading of the Supplier would be entertained?

The primary objective of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, (“MSME Act”) is to facilitate the promotion and development and enhance the competitiveness of micro, small and medium enterprises. The MSME Act contains provisions for dispute resolution which are applicable to disputes involving suppliers. Section 18 of the MSME Act provides that any party with a dispute regarding amount due to a Supplier may make a reference to the MSME Facilitation Council (“Council”) for conciliation. If conciliation is unsuccessful, the Council may either take up the dispute itself for arbitration or refer the parties to an arbitral institution. Section 18(4) further provides that the Council or center providing the alternative dispute resolution services shall have jurisdiction to act as an arbitrator or conciliator in a dispute between the Supplier located within its jurisdiction and a buyer located anywhere in India.Section 18 became contentious when multiple cases arose where a party involved in a dispute with a Supplier filed proceedings in court challenging its applicability to their dispute in light of the arbitration agreement entered between the parties. In general, presence of an arbitration agreement would not invalidate arbitration proceedings that have been initiated under the MSME Act, since the MSME Act is a special statute which would override any agreement between the parties. This position was also upheld by the Supreme Court. However, in those cases, the Supplier had initiated proceedings under section 18 of the MSME Act before the Buyer invoked arbitration under the agreement. These cases did not deal with a scenario where the Buyer invoked arbitration under the agreement where there was no reference of a dispute to the Council. For such situations, it has been held that, if the intention of section 18(4) of the MSME Act was to create a legal bar on a party who has a contract with a Supplier under the MSME Act from invoking section 11 of the Arbitration Act, then the legislature would have expressly provided that the MSME Act overrides any arbitration agreement entered under the MSME Act. Section 18(4) would come into play only in cases where a reference was made to the Council under section 18(1). The Court noted the use of the word “may” in section 18(1) and held that in light of the language used, it cannot be said to be mandatory for a Buyer to refer its dispute to the Council under section 18. Since the jurisdiction of the Council had not yet been invoked, there was nothing barring the court from appointing an arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement between the parties.By making section 18 of the MSME Act directory, Buyers have been given a way out to circumvent the provisions under the MSME Act.Q. Which of the following is true regarding the provision for dispute resolution under the MSME Act? 1. MSME facilitation council deals with the dispute involving suppliers 2. MSME facilitation council is the body which would be handling the arbitration for the parties in dispute 3. The supplier should mandatorily be located in India.

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: In this question below is given a passage followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.PassageIndia has signed two separate agreements with the USA and the EC.This brings to a satisfactory conclusion the Market Access Conciliations in textiles which had been in progress for some time. These discussions were held with a view to facilitating trade in textile products between India and the USA and EU countries. At present, more than two-thirds of India’s total textile exports go to these countries. These agreements which came into force from Dec. 31, 1994, prior to the establishment of the WTO, provide very significant additional market access in these two major markets (USA and EU) for Indian textile products. In particular, the agreements are expected to provide a fillip to handloom and powerloom production and exports which are of high priority because of their direct linkage with employment generation.India will have to abide by certain quality standards to continue getting export orders from these countries.a) if you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;b) if you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;c) if you think the ‘data are inadequate’, i.e., from the facts given you cannot say whether the inference is likely to be true or false;d) if you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given; ande) if you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev