In the question two statements are given, followed by two conclusions, I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements. Statement I: All notebooks are diaries Statement II: All books are notebooks Conclusion I: All diaries are books Conclusion II: All books are diaries

Careful and cautious are synonyms (they mean the same thing). Boastful and arrogant are also synonyms. The answer is not (choice b) because humble means the opposite of boastful. The answer is not choice c or d because neither means the same as boastful.

To ensure that debts taken are repaid promptly, the customer's requirements and future prospects ought to be studied and their work constantly checked. Thus, both the courses follow.

A has advised B the route to Jammu. This means that B wishes to go to Jammu. So, I is implicit. The statement mentions only A's advice to B. So, II is not implicit.

The Constitution of India has laid down the doctrine of 'equality before the law'. So, argument II holds strong. Also, we cannot judge the intentions of a person behind committing a crime, So, argument I is vague.

Hapl means cloud; lesh means burst; srench means pin; och means ball; and resbo means nine. Leshsrench (choice a) doesn't contain any of the words needed for cloud nine. We know that och means ball, so that rules out choices b and c. When you combine hapl (cloud) with resbo (nine), you get the correct answer

Clearly, one complaint is enough for a wrong doing. This should be confirmed by catching the guilty red-handed and then strict action taken against him. So, only course I follows.

A leopard, cougar, and lion all belong to the cat family; an elephant does not.

The passage discusses the role of industrial exhibitions in measuring the industrial progress of a country and compares the progress of less advanced countries with the industrial power of countries like the U.K., U.S.A., and Russia. Here's the analysis of the options based on the passage:

1. Option A - greatly tax the poor economies:
   • The passage does not discuss the economic burden of industrial exhibitions on poor economies. Instead, it focuses on their role in measuring industrial progress and comparing it to more advanced countries.
   • This option is not supported by the passage.
2. Option B - are more useful for the developed countries like U.S.A. whose products stand out superior to those of the developing countries:
   • The passage does mention that the pavilions of the U.K., U.S.A., and Russia are centers of greatest attention, implying that their products are more advanced and attract more attention. However, it does not directly state that industrial exhibitions are more useful for developed countries.
   • This option is partially supported, but it overemphasizes the benefit to developed countries at the expense of developing countries.
3. Option C - are not of much use to the countries who are industrially backward:
   • The passage does not suggest that industrial exhibitions are not useful for industrially backward countries. It discusses how such exhibitions enable these countries to measure their industrial progress and compare it with more advanced nations.
   • This option is not supported by the passage.
4. Option D - boost up production qualitatively and quantitatively by analytical comparison of a country's products with those of the developed countries:
   • The passage mentions that industrial exhibitions allow us to measure our own industrial progress in comparison with the industrial power of countries like the U.K., U.S.A., and Russia. This suggests that such exhibitions help in analyzing and comparing products, which could lead to improvements in production qualitatively and quantitatively.
   • This option is strongly supported by the passage.
5. Final Answer:
   • The best supported statement by the passage is D. boost up production qualitatively and quantitatively by analytical comparison of a country's products with those of the developed countries.

The problem is that despite an increase in staff strength, the Institute has failed in its objective of implementing its plan. So, either there should be reasons for the lackening or the plans are a failure and must be revised for practical implementation. Thus, both the courses follow.