Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

  1. >
  2. ≥
  3. <
  4. ≤
  5. =
4 views

1 Answers

Option 3 : <

Let us check each option:

1) A < D > B ≤ E ≤ C > F → Relation between A and B and C and D cannot be determined.

2) A < D ≥ B ≤ E ≤ C > F → Relation between A and B and C and D cannot be determined.

3) A < D < B ≤ E ≤ C > F → A < B and C > D is true.

4) A < D ≤ B ≤ E ≤ C > F → A < B is true but C ≥ D.

5) A < D = B ≤ E ≤ C > F → A < B is true but C ≥ D.

Hence, ‘<’ is the correct answer.
4 views

Related Questions

Two statements are followed by three Conclusions I, II and III. You have to consider the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You are to decide which of the given conclusions can definitely be drawn from the given statements and indicate your answer accordingly. Statements: I. Political parties that opposed simultaneous polls before the Law Commission mostly cited federalism, Constitution and impracticability for their opposition, but Goa Forward Party chose coconuts to drive home its point against the proposal of ‘One Nation, One Election'. II. The regional party that is part of the BJP-led Goa government cited coconut, its party symbol, to argue that regional issues will go unaddressed in the noise of simultaneous polls. Conclusions: I. To buttress its reasoning, Goa Forward Party representative cited the party's history and struggle in protesting against cutting down of coconut trees in Goa before it came to power with ally BJP in March 2017. II. The party had protested against the BJP government's decision to amend rules to simplify the procedure of cutting down coconut trees by removing it from the list of trees. III. The commission held talks with political parties on the proposal of simultaneous elections.?
1 Answers 5 Views
Two statements are followed by two Conclusions I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You are to decide which of the given conclusions can definitely be drawn from the given statements and indicate your answer accordingly. Statements: I. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has sought information on offshore investments by directors of RNT Associates, a closely held firm which functions as a family office and investment vehicle of Ratan Tata.  II. The ED order, dated June 14, also calls for details of investments or loans from RNT Associates and its directors to a Singapore-based entity, RNT Associates Ltd. Conclusions: The order is under provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and the documents are being sought for the purpose of investigation under FEMA. The nature of queries from Enforcement Directorate is related to RNT Associates’ investment portfolio. It is compliant with all disclosures and existing laws governing investments and is extending all cooperation.?
1 Answers 7 Views