A) If only conclusion I follows | B) If only conclusion II follows |

C) If neither I nor II follows | D) If both I and II follow |

Explanation:

Which factors influence the food processing industry cannot be determined from the statement. Hence I does not follow. II does not follow because the statement doesn't give any clue about the industry's centrality to our lives.

A) Only conclusion I follows | B) Both conclusion II & III follows |

C) None follows | D) Only conclusion II follows |

A) Only Conclusion I is true | B) Only Conclusion II is true |

C) Both conclusions I & II are true | D) Neither conclusion I nor II is true |

Explanation:

From the given Statements :

1. I > W > T > N

2. F = G = C

Conclusions are :

I. W > I (False)

II. C > N (True)

A) Only 3 | B) Both 2 & 3 |

C) Any two of (1, 2 & 3) | D) None |

Explanation:

Using Both 1 & 2 statements we get the rate of interest as in (1) we have given principle amount and in (2) compound interest for 2 years. By this data we get the rate%.

Using Both 1 & 3 statements we can get the rate% as we have principle amount & difference between compound interest and simple interest in 2 years.

Using Both 2 & 3 statements we get compound interest & simple interest by which we get principle amount. So that we can calculate %rate.

Hence by using any two of the three statements(1,2&3) we get rate of interest.

A) Only A follows | B) Only B follows |

C) Both (A) and (B) follows | D) Neither (A) nor (B) follows |

A) a >= b | B) a <= b |

C) a < b | D) a > b |

Explanation:

From solving 1 and 2 we get,

1.

5a(a-3)-3(a-3) = 0

(5a-3)(a-3) = 0

a = 3 or 3/5

2.

3b(b+2)-1(b+2) = 0

b = -2 or b = 1/3

Here when a = 3, a > b for b = -2 and b = 1/3

when a = 3/5. a > b for b = -2 and b = 1/3.

Hence, it is clear that a > b.

A) only conclusion B is true. | B) only conclusion A is true. |

C) neither conclusion I nor II is true. | D) either conclusion I or II is true. |

Explanation:

From given statements, we can conclude that

**N > C < T < L= P > Q** .....(1)

Here given that **C > Y** but in eq(1) we got that **C < T < T <= P** => Y is definitely less than P.

So only conclusion B is True.

A) If statement B alone is sufficient but statement A alone is not sufficient. | B) If statement A alone is sufficient but statement B alone is not sufficient. |

C) If both statement together are sufficient, but neither statement alone is sufficient. | D) If statement A and B together are not sufficient. |

Explanation:

From both statements we cannot conclude the train catched by Harish

Since he missed at 4.15 and train coes at 4.30, 4.45, 5.00,...

But in B given that he didn't catch the train at 4.45 and after that.

So both statements A & B together are not sufficient to answer the question.

A) Only A is sufficient | B) Only B is sufficient |

C) Both (A) and (B) are sufficient | D) None of the above |

Explanation:

From statement B,

As the value of L = 0, the value of KL = 0.

Hence only statement B is sufficient.