Is Raju fond of travelling, and which of the given statements is or are sufficient to answer this question?

Introduction / Context:
This data sufficiency question asks whether we can decide if a person, Raju, is fond of travelling based on the given statements. We must judge sufficiency, not write a biography of Raju.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Main question: Is Raju fond of travelling?
• Statement 1: Raju has seen East, West, North and Southern parts of India.
• Statement 2: Raju likes to be in the company of his friends.
• Fondness for travelling is a behavioural preference related to travel.

Concept / Approach:
In many exam styles, if a person has travelled extensively across all regions of a country without any other constraints mentioned, it is treated as strong evidence that the person is fond of travelling. Liking company of friends alone does not say anything specific about travel. The question is framed with this typical exam convention in mind.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Consider statement 1 alone. Raju has seen East, West, North and Southern parts of India, which indicates extensive journeys across the country. Step 2: Under usual reasoning in such questions, covering all major regions of a country is taken as enough to conclude that a person is fond of travelling, unless there is contradictory data. Step 3: Consider statement 2 alone. Liking to be in the company of friends relates to social preference and tells nothing specific about travel. People who like friends may or may not like travelling. Step 4: Therefore statement 1 alone is treated as sufficient to answer the question, while statement 2 alone is not.

Verification / Alternative check:
Think in terms of exam logic rather than real world exceptions. If a question designer wants to show that someone likes travel, they usually write that the person has visited many places or all parts of a country. By contrast, information about liking friends is often used for questions about social behaviour, not travel. Hence the pattern supports statement 1 as sufficient.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A reverses the roles of the statements and incorrectly treats statement 2 as sufficient. Option C claims that both are needed, but statement 2 adds nothing to what is already clear from statement 1. Option D says data are insufficient, which ignores the standard interpretation of extensive travel. Option E also overstates the need for combining statements.

Common Pitfalls:
Some students become over cautious and feel that even extensive travel may happen for compulsion, so they mark data insufficient. However, competitive exam questions usually expect you to use the most natural and straightforward interpretation of such statements rather than hunt for rare exceptions.

Final Answer:
The correct assessment is that statement 1 alone is sufficient while statement 2 alone is insufficient to decide whether Raju is fond of travelling.