Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CAT Exam > CAT Questions > Mike has been told he will have to pay the fi...

Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.

a)
even if
b)
furthermore
c)
on grounds that
d)
despite
e)
on purpose that

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in ...

Explanation:

The sentence talks about Mike being told to pay a fine despite his high rank in the military. Among the given options, the correct choice is 'D' - despite.

'Despite' means 'in spite of' or 'notwithstanding', which is appropriate in the given context.

Option 'A' - even if, is not appropriate here as it suggests a conditional situation that may or may not happen, but the sentence implies that Mike has already been told to pay the fine.

Option 'B' - furthermore, is not relevant here as it indicates an additional point, which is not required in the given sentence.

Option 'C' - on grounds that, is not suitable as it implies a reason for the fine, which is not given in the sentence.

Option 'E' - on purpose that, is incorrect as it implies an intention behind the fine, which is not mentioned in the sentence.

Hence, the correct answer is option 'D' - despite.

Answered by Wizius Careers · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Conjunctions - Practice (MCQ)
10 Ques | 10 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CAT tests

Community Answer

Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in ...

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions.A few years ago Zine el Abidine Ben Ali looked set to be president of Tunisia for life, having ruled since 1987. Instead, on Wednesday, a Tunisian military court sentenced him to prison for life, for complicity in the murder and attempted murder of demonstrators during the revolution that began the Arab spring. In practice, this seems likely to mean exile for life in Saudi Arabia, the country the 75-year-old former ruler fled to with his family after the deaths of more than 100 protesters failed to stop the popular uprising. The two trials that concluded on Wednesday were far from ideal, even if several of his most senior officials were convicted, and some acquitted. Ben Ali's absence from Tunisia meant his trial was conducted in absentia. So for him justice has still not been served, although all of his co-defendants were present. If he did ever return to the country he should be entitled to a new hearing. There appears little chance of that at present, with the current Tunisian government making only the most desultory requests of the Saudis. The Tunisian prime minister has said the issue of Ben Ali's extradition is "minor". The trial also took place in a military court, which automatically raises concerns about independence. Military justice should be limited to prosecuting military personnel for strictly military issues, and trials for killing civilians belong in ordinary courts. Although significant reforms in military justice took place after the revolution, bringing in some civilian judges and allowing the victims of crimes to participate in trials as full parties, problems remain. A senior civilian judge told me in Tunis a few weeks ago: "The military judges now wear robes, but underneath they still have their uniforms and their ranks" - meaning that the judges are still subject to military hierarchy. The defence minister still appoints military judges. Despite these problems, what is going on in Tunisia should be recognised as significant. It was not just Ben Ali who was convicted on Wednesday but several other senior figures, including his former minister of the interior Rafik Hadj Kacem. And although the lawyers for the victims and the defendants did appear to have well-founded complaints about their ability to access some of the evidence, in our monitoring of the hearings we found little evidence of serious violations of the right to a fair trial. Indeed the court acquitted others, including Ali Seriati, former head of the presidential guard, to the great disgust of many. But the prosecution had not presented evidence that Seriati or his forces were present during the relevant shootings, or that he gave orders to shoot demonstrators.The author of the passage clearly

View answer

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions.A few years ago Zine el Abidine Ben Ali looked set to be president of Tunisia for life, having ruled since 1987. Instead, on Wednesday, a Tunisian military court sentenced him to prison for life, for complicity in the murder and attempted murder of demonstrators during the revolution that began the Arab spring. In practice, this seems likely to mean exile for life in Saudi Arabia, the country the 75-year-old former ruler fled to with his family after the deaths of more than 100 protesters failed to stop the popular uprising. The two trials that concluded on Wednesday were far from ideal, even if several of his most senior officials were convicted, and some acquitted. Ben Ali's absence from Tunisia meant his trial was conducted in absentia. So for him justice has still not been served, although all of his co-defendants were present. If he did ever return to the country he should be entitled to a new hearing. There appears little chance of that at present, with the current Tunisian government making only the most desultory requests of the Saudis. The Tunisian prime minister has said the issue of Ben Ali's extradition is "minor". The trial also took place in a military court, which automatically raises concerns about independence. Military justice should be limited to prosecuting military personnel for strictly military issues, and trials for killing civilians belong in ordinary courts. Although significant reforms in military justice took place after the revolution, bringing in some civilian judges and allowing the victims of crimes to participate in trials as full parties, problems remain. A senior civilian judge told me in Tunis a few weeks ago: "The military judges now wear robes, but underneath they still have their uniforms and their ranks" - meaning that the judges are still subject to military hierarchy. The defence minister still appoints military judges. Despite these problems, what is going on in Tunisia should be recognised as significant. It was not just Ben Ali who was convicted on Wednesday but several other senior figures, including his former minister of the interior Rafik Hadj Kacem. And although the lawyers for the victims and the defendants did appear to have well-founded complaints about their ability to access some of the evidence, in our monitoring of the hearings we found little evidence of serious violations of the right to a fair trial. Indeed the court acquitted others, including Ali Seriati, former head of the presidential guard, to the great disgust of many. But the prosecution had not presented evidence that Seriati or his forces were present during the relevant shootings, or that he gave orders to shoot demonstrators.It can be inferred from the passage that:I. The Tunision military court stuck by the facts in a certain case even though the popular sentiment on the issue went against the verdict of the court.II. Military judges cannot have jurisdiction over all matters.III. Though not perfect, what's happening in Tunisia offers hope for more.

View answer

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions.A few years ago Zine el Abidine Ben Ali looked set to be president of Tunisia for life, having ruled since 1987. Instead, on Wednesday, a Tunisian military court sentenced him to prison for life, for complicity in the murder and attempted murder of demonstrators during the revolution that began the Arab spring. In practice, this seems likely to mean exile for life in Saudi Arabia, the country the 75-year-old former ruler fled to with his family after the deaths of more than 100 protesters failed to stop the popular uprising. The two trials that concluded on Wednesday were far from ideal, even if several of his most senior officials were convicted, and some acquitted. Ben Ali's absence from Tunisia meant his trial was conducted in absentia. So for him justice has still not been served, although all of his co-defendants were present. If he did ever return to the country he should be entitled to a new hearing. There appears little chance of that at present, with the current Tunisian government making only the most desultory requests of the Saudis. The Tunisian prime minister has said the issue of Ben Ali's extradition is "minor". The trial also took place in a military court, which automatically raises concerns about independence. Military justice should be limited to prosecuting military personnel for strictly military issues, and trials for killing civilians belong in ordinary courts. Although significant reforms in military justice took place after the revolution, bringing in some civilian judges and allowing the victims of crimes to participate in trials as full parties, problems remain. A senior civilian judge told me in Tunis a few weeks ago: "The military judges now wear robes, but underneath they still have their uniforms and their ranks" - meaning that the judges are still subject to military hierarchy. The defence minister still appoints military judges. Despite these problems, what is going on in Tunisia should be recognised as significant. It was not just Ben Ali who was convicted on Wednesday but several other senior figures, including his former minister of the interior Rafik Hadj Kacem. And although the lawyers for the victims and the defendants did appear to have well-founded complaints about their ability to access some of the evidence, in our monitoring of the hearings we found little evidence of serious violations of the right to a fair trial. Indeed the court acquitted others, including Ali Seriati, former head of the presidential guard, to the great disgust of many. But the prosecution had not presented evidence that Seriati or his forces were present during the relevant shootings, or that he gave orders to shoot demonstrators.The author of the passage is most likely to believe that

View answer

Instructions:In the virtual game of Shootem all, M number of virtual people areseated in a circular arrangement, all of them facing the centre as follows. Also, they are number from 1 to M.There is a shooter at the centre of the circle, who can point to and shoot any particular person among the M people.There are N rounds to this game. Initially, the shooter is pointing the guntowards the Kth numbered person, where 1 <= K <= N, but he does not shoot him yet. After the first round, he turns to the first person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him. After the second round, he turns to the second person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him, similarly, after the Nth round, he turns to the Nth person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him. While counting, we will also count the vacant spots. For example, if the person numbered 3 is already shot dead, the 2nd person to the left of 2 is 4, not 5, since we have to count 3 as well. Also, while counting, if the count exceeds the total count of the table(i.e M), we go around the circle again. For example, if there are 8 people, the 10th person to the left of 1 is 3, and the 8th person to the left of 1 is 1 himself.If at the end of any round, the shooter is pointing to a person who has already been shot in one of the previous rounds, he does not shoot anyone in that round and continues to the next round.Also, suppose, all the persons are already shot in the nth round, where n < N, then in the (n+1)th round, the shooter shoots himself, and the game ends, it does not move to the (n+2)th round.For example, suppose M = 8, N = 4, and K = 3, after the first round, the shooter shoots 4, after the second round, the shooter shoots 6, after the 3rd round, he shoots 1, andafter the 4th and final round, he shoots 5.Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.Suppose M = 12 and N = 12, persons numbered 6, 12, 3, and 9 are alive at the end of all rounds. How many values can K take? Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer?

View answer

Instructions:In the virtual game of Shootem all, M number of virtual people areseated in a circular arrangement, all of them facing the centre as follows. Also, they are number from 1 to M.There is a shooter at the centre of the circle, who can point to and shoot any particular person among the M people.There are N rounds to this game. Initially, the shooter is pointing the guntowards the Kth numbered person, where 1 <= K <= N, but he does not shoot him yet. After the first round, he turns to the first person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him. After the second round, he turns to the second person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him, similarly, after the Nth round, he turns to the Nth person to the left of the person he was facing and shoots him. While counting, we will also count the vacant spots. For example, if the person numbered 3 is already shot dead, the 2nd person to the left of 2 is 4, not 5, since we have to count 3 as well. Also, while counting, if the count exceeds the total count of the table(i.e M), we go around the circle again. For example, if there are 8 people, the 10th person to the left of 1 is 3, and the 8th person to the left of 1 is 1 himself.If at the end of any round, the shooter is pointing to a person who has already been shot in one of the previous rounds, he does not shoot anyone in that round and continues to the next round.Also, suppose, all the persons are already shot in the nth round, where n < N, then in the (n+1)th round, the shooter shoots himself, and the game ends, it does not move to the (n+2)th round.For example, suppose M = 8, N = 4, and K = 3, after the first round, the shooter shoots 4, after the second round, the shooter shoots 6, after the 3rd round, he shoots 1, andafter the 4th and final round, he shoots 5.Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.Suppose M = 25, in the first 20 rounds, in how many rounds does the shooter not shoot anyone?

View answer

Top Courses for CATView all

Quantitative Aptitude (Quant)

CAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CAT

Mock Test Series for SNAP

Mock Test Series for XAT

Top Courses for CAT

View all

Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2025 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Mike has been told he will have to pay the fine ---- his high rank in the military.a)even ifb)furthermorec)on grounds thatd)despitee)on purpose thatCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.

Explore Courses for CAT exam