Question
Statement: T > U ≥ V; T ≤ W = X; I > U
>Conclusion: I. U < XÂ Â Â Â Â II. I > T In these questions, relationship between different elements is shown in the statements. These statements are followed by two conclusions:Solution
X = W ≥ T > U ≥ V                             X > U. Hence conclusion I is true. X = W ≥ T > U < I                              No relationship can be established between I and T. Hence conclusion II is not true.
Sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 in computing the prescribed period may be:
Mortgagor’s right to redemption is provided under S.____ of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
A, a police-officer, whose duty it is to prevent robbery, abets the commission of robbery. Here, the robbery is not committed.
Which of the following cases gave protection to women from sexual harassment at their workplace?
The proceedings of Arbitral Tribunal________.
An act done by a person in a state of intoxication administered against his will is
Under section 190(2) of CrPC who may empower any Magistrate of second class to take cognizance of offences?
The judges cannot go beyond litera legis is propounded by which rule of interpretation?
Interim measures can be ordered by Court as per which section of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?
Whose opinion as to electronic signature is a relevant fact: