Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

  1. It provided two Dominion status: India and Pakistan
  2. A Boundary Commission was set up under Radcliff.
  3. Both Dominions were to have appointed Governor-General by British King
  4. British Government would control over the dominions till the Constitution is made
6 views

1 Answers

Option 4 : British Government would control over the dominions till the Constitution is made

Option 4 is NOT correct.

British Parliament ratified the Mountbatten Plan on 18 July 1947 for the Independence of India Act.

  • The act was implemented on 15 August 1947.
  • The act provided two dominion status: India and Pakistan. Hence statement 1 is correct.
  • The act also established a Boundary Commission to determine the boundaries between two dominions which was headed by Sir Cyril Radcliff. Hence statement 2 is correct.
  • The authority of the British crown over princely states ceased to exist and they were free to join either of the dominions.
  • Both dominions of India and Pakistan were to have a Governor-general to be appointed by the British King. Hence statement 3 is correct.
    • It also provided for a common Governor-General if both of them agreed.
  • Both of them would be governed by the Government of India Act 1935 till the constitution was made.
  • British Government would not continue any control on any dominions. Hence statement 4 is not correct.
  • The Governor-General was invested with adequate powers until March 1948 to issue an order for the effective implementation of the Indian Independence Act 1947.
6 views

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong' arguments and which is/are ‘weak' arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement:  The central government has told the Supreme Court that anti-adultery laws were required to protect the ‘sanctity of marriage and the institution of family', and any attempt to do away with these laws would hurt ‘Indian ethos'. The government was responding to a court notice on a public interest litigation which wanted the law struck down as it was not gender neutral and the provisions were tilted against men. Which among the following arguments support the above statement regarding the ‘revision of such laws' in the best possible manner Arguments: I. It seemed to suggest that women were chattel owned by men and could be guided and misguided. II. This would erode the sanctity of marriage as an institution and the societal fabric. The issue of making the provision gender neutral was already pending before the government. III. Any step towards decriminalising the offence in the interim would be detrimental to Indian ethos which gives paramount importance to the institution and sanctity of marriage.?
1 Answers 4 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