Question
In the question below some statements are given
followed by three conclusions 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 the given conclusion definitely follows from the given statements, disregarding commonly known facts. Statements: Some Lawns are Prawns. All Prawns are Fishes. No Fish is Whale. Conclusions: I. Some Prawns are Fish. II. Some Lawns are Whale. III. No Whale is Prawn.Solution
All Prawns are Fish (A) →I.I. → Some Prawns are Fishes (I). Hence conclusion I follows. Some Lawns are Prawns (I) + All Prawns are Fishes (A) → Some Lawns are Fishes (I) + No Fish is Whale (E) → Some Lawns are not Whale (O). Hence conclusion II does not follows. All Prawns are Fishes (A) + No Fish is Whale (E) → No Prawns is Whale (E) → Conversion → No Whale is Prawns (E). Hence conclusion III follows.
Where any asset reconstruction company or any person fails to comply with any direction issued by the Reserve Bank under this Act the adjudicating auth...
Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that ...
For a witness to be examined residing in Jurisdiction of a court situated outside India____________.
Contract for sale is__________.
Which of the following is not considered a corporate person under Indian law?
Amendment of pleading can be permitted_____.
An admission is:
______________________ as per the IBC means a person to whom an operational debt is owed and includes any person to whom such debt has been legally assi...
What powers does the Supreme Court have concerning the enforcement of rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution?
What is mandatory under the Act for the LLP to suffix as last words in its name?
Relevant for Exams:
