Reasoning the Reason

LEGAL ,LOGICAL , ANALYTICAL REASONING

LEGAL REASONING


1. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person can sue another for compensation if his legal right has been violated.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A, B, C, D and E were ship owners who shipped tea from China to England. A, B, C and D combined together to drive E out of the trade by offering half the price to customers who would deal with them to the exclusion of E. E, who was unable to run his shipping company at such reduced rates, had to close his operations. E sues A, B, C and D for compensation. Will E succeed?

(a) Yes, because A, B, C, D had adopted unlawful means
(b) No, A, B, C, D had done nothing unlawful
(c) Yes, because E had suffered a loss
(d) None of the above.

2. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: When a person represents to another something as a true fact, knowing fully well that it is not true, he is guilty of fraud. The person subjected to fraud may avoid an agreement.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A presents a horse for sale. The horse is kept on display so that anyone interested could examine it. The horse has a cracked hoof and it is cleverly concealed by the owner. B tells A, “If you do not deny it, I shall assume that the horse is sound.” A keeps silent. B purchases the horse.

(a) B can avoid the agreement on discovery of the defect
(b) B cannot avoid the agreement as the horse was on display and he could have satisfied himself of its soundness by personal examination
(c) B cannot avoid the agreement as A did not make any representation to mislead him. He merely kept silent so that B could find things out by himself.
(d) None of the above.

The answers are: 1. (b); 2. (a)


LOGICAL REASONING


1. In a certain code language ROUTINE is written as VMRGFLI. How will CRUELTY be written in that code language?
(a) VPVCZRL
(b) BGOVFIX
(c) WPCVZRL
(d) VOCVZRL.

2. If ‘M x N’ means ‘M is the daughter of N’, ‘M + N’ means ‘M’ is the father of N’. ‘M ÷ N’ means ‘M is the mother of N’ and ‘M – N’ means ‘M is the brother of N’ then in the expression ‘P ÷ Q + R – T x K’, how ‘P is related to K’?
(a) Daughter-in-law
(b) Sister-in-law
(c) Aunt
(d) Mother-in-law.

3. If both the statements “All flowers are petals” and “Some petals are garlands” are true then which of the following statements definitely follows?
(a) Some garlands are flowers
(b) Some flowers are garlands
(c) All petals are flowers
(d) Some garlands are petals.

4. X started walking straight towards South. He walked a distance of 5 m and then took a left turn and walked a distance of 3 m. Then he took a right turn and walked a distance of 5 m again. X is facing which direction now?
(a) North-East
(b) South
(c) North
(d) South-West.

The answers are: 1. (b); 2. (d); 3. (d); 4. (b)


ANALYTICAL REASONING


Directions (Qs. 1 and 2): In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts and then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the statement.

Give answer

(a) If only I follows
(b) If either I or II follows
(c) If both I and II follow
(d) If neither I nor II follows.

1. Statement: Being from a business family, Chandan was apparently convinced by his parents and other family members to join the family trade.
Conclusions:
I. People should take up their family profession so that family prospers.
II. It is necessary to keep family members happy by choosing family’s business.

2. Statement: Mr. X, an officer, is alleged to be involved in cases of corruption in office ABC, along with a group of persons.
Conclusions:
I. Mr. X may be a corrupt official from office ABC.
II. Mr. X may not be involved in cases of corruption in office ABC.

The answers are: 1. (d); 2. (b)

Leave a Comment