I follows; that is why the government is taking action against erring autorickshaws. II is obvious.
A zoo is a place where wild animals are Kept.
Fall of demand of gold is due to rising prices. Hence, I can be concluded.II can't be concluded from the given statement.
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.
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.
The sentence ''the economy has been dragged down by agriculture'' does not necessarily imply that agriculture showed negative growth . Possibility of nominal growth can't be ruled out. Hence, I does not follow.
We can't co-relate the given conclusions with the statement given. Hence, neither I nor II follows.
Quashing of ban will result in conclusion I. Hence I follows. But II does not follow from the statement.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.