Solution

Solution

Solution

Solution

By the rule of alligation,

The ratio of first and second parts = 2:4 = 1:2

The quantity of first part = ⅓ × 1200 = 400 kg

Solution

By the rule of alligation,

The ratio will be = 1.75:3.25 = 7:13

Solution

Total distance travelled by man is 60 km

Let the journey on the foot = x km (say)

Journey on bicycle = (60-x) km

Solution

A can complete a piece of work in 6 ⅔ days = 20/3 days.

A’s one day work = 1/ (20/3) = (3/20)

B’s one day work = ⅕

A worked 2 days and B worked (2 + x) days. ( where x is the number days in the end B worked alone)

Solution

Solution

Solution

Anand invested for 4 years ( 48 months)

Manoj joined after 6 months which is he invested for 3.5 years ( 42 months)

Anand : Manoj = (25,000 × 48) : (50,000 × 42) = 4 : 7

Anand’s = 4/7 × 12540 = Rs.4560

Solution

In the given sentence, we need a preposition that is to be used with the verb arrive. And the verb arrive carries the preposition ‘in’ when the reference is to a city or a country.

What time are you going to arrive in India?

Solution

In the given sentence, the underlined word chronic refers to persisting (of an illness) for a long time (or) constantly recurring. So, in the above context, of all the given options, long-term is the word that is nearest to the meaning of chronic.

Solution

In the given sentence, we need a tense that refers to the happening action and we use present continuous tense when we want to talk about an action that is happening now (or) at this time (and is unfinished). So, we say I am using it myself.

Solution

We can divide the given sentence into two statements.

1. He is such a man

2. I honour

In the given context, we need a relative/conjunctive pronoun (connects two statements) and in English the word ‘as’ is used as a pronoun after the words such, same….etc.

He is such a man as I honour.

Solution

Option (a):

This statement can be directly inferred from the first sentence of the given passage, “Seat-belt wearers are less likely to be killed in road accidents”.

Option (b)& (c):

In the given passage, it is mentioned that “analysts had failed to see was, that cautious drivers were more likely to wear the belts and were also less likely to cause ‘big accidents’, while reckless drivers were more likely to cause ‘big’ accidents and were less likely to wear belts” which can be interpreted as “In the early data on seatbelt use, analysts had failed to take the cautious & reckless drivers into consideration and cautious drivers cause less accidents compared to reckless drivers”. So, option (b) & option(c) can be inferred from the passage.

Option (d):

This statement is not true as it is given in the passage that “cautious drivers were more likely to wear seat belts and reckless drivers were less likely to wear seat belts”. So, this option cannot be inferred from the given passage.