I may or may not be true. But II is obvious from the statement . That is why India decides to retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons.
I follows because the functions stated are obviously those of an export house. II does not follow because ''write to us'' is only for the reader's convenience. It seldom so happens that business houses do not entertain clients face-to-face.
All that statements tell us is that the relationship between the two countries is not constant. Now, the change may be in either direction. It can be either I or II.
We are not told anything about the loss -making PSUs. So I does not follow .II states just the opposite of what the statement says. Surplus and deficit are antonyms.
The word only suggests that 5% is inadequate. But we are not told what the adequate level is. So I does not follow. II cannot be ascertained because when a railway minister talk of public funds, it is not on the basis of his private property. Even a poor man can deal with large public funds.
As the statement is talking about becoming a superpower, we can conclude that it is about to become so. Hence I follows. Nothing can be concluded about the migration of IT professional. Hence II does not follow.
Fall of demand of gold is due to rising prices. Hence, I can be concluded.II can't be concluded from the given statement.
A zoo is a place where wild animals are Kept.
I follows; that is why the government is taking action against erring autorickshaws. II is obvious.
The statement does not make clear who is more dishonest between X and Y. But, either conclusion I or II must follow.
I follows. That is why it is a jolt to the water industry. The presence of pesticides undermines the very purpose of ''safe drinking''. II does not follow because the statement talks only about ''bottled water'', not drinking water in general.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.