Challenging authority people, especially if it means facing penalties, may be a tough decision to make, and there are several aspects to take into account. Choosing to oppose authority people can be a positive approach to stand up for what is right or to remedy a perceived injustice, but it can also result in negative repercussions such as conflict, disciplinary action, or even job loss. When someone decides to oppose authoritative people, it may show that they are prepared to take chances and stand up for their values, even if it is uncomfortable or unpopular. They may also appreciate communication honesty and openness and be willing to handle difficulties honestly. However, it is critical to thoroughly examine the circumstances and make a choice based on the probable dangers and advantages. As a result, the right answer to the question is b) Somewhat likely.
When a fact is said to be “Not proved” as per Indian Evidence Act?
The term criminal conspiracy as per IPC means when two or more persons agree to do or cause to do_____________________
Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 who are the persons who are authorized to investigate?
How many sections are embodied under the Act?
When words have a latent meaning or a double meaning, then it is defamatory. This is called _______.
An application for the renewal of a driving licence can be made either prior to or within ____________ time period after its expiry as per the Motor Veh...
What was held by the Court in the case of Powell v. Lee?
A corporate debtor shall be dissolved under the IBC as per section 54 by the order of the ___________________
________is a legal proceeding involving a person or business that is unable to repay outstanding debts.
According to Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, which of the following statements accurately reflects the treatment of agreements to perform impossi...