I does not follow because '' senior players'' is no category in the statement. II does not follow because ''more'' does not compare the two categories of players. The statement merely implies that first-class players should get more than what they do at present.
I is obvious, but II is uncertain.
I is true. Because change in quality and method of printing and marking it reader-friendly at reduced price may make the company to compete the market norms.
Since 'fielding' is said to be indispensable, hence conclusion I follows. Besides good fielding, their may be some other factors also which might be needed to win the match.
Exemption in excise duty will have negative effect on national exchequer. Hence I follows. II is an inference to the contrary.
I follows because additional amount will lead to road infrastructure, which in turn will lead to industrial growth. II does not follow. Will this additional amount go to NHDP? Or will it be used for alternative road projects? If the statement had answered the formed question s 'Yes', than we could have concluded II with certainty.
I does not follow because of the word 'certainly'. II is obvious.
I follow because immunistation will give the body a strength to fight a war against the viruses. II does not follow because of the wording ''if the body loses the war''.
I is not true because of the wording''....and no person who is entirely free from evil.'' II is obvious.
I may or may not be true but II is obvious because of the last part of the statement.
It is true that if calamities are''a regular event''. they must strike every few years. But floods are not the only calamity. The calamity may strike in the form of drought, earthquake, etc. Hence I does not follow. II does not follow because scientific expertise is not the only problem; the trouble may be with implementation.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.