Statements: X ≥ W, W ≤ U, U > T, T < S
Conclusions: I) X > U
II) S > U
III) T < W
On combining: X ≥ W ≤ U > T < S Conclusions: I) X > U → False (as X ≥ W ≤ U → thus the clear relation between X and U cannot be determined) II) S > U → False (as U > T < S → thus the clear relation between S and U cannot be determined) III) T < W → False (as W ≤ U > T → thus the clear relation between T and W cannot be determined) Hence, no conclusions follow.
Under the Competition Act, 2002 the Chairperson, if for any reason, is unable to attend a meeting of the Commission, the _______________ present at the ...
A agrees, in writing, to sell a horse to B for “Rs. 1,000 or Rs. 1,500”.
For a revocation to be effective when should it be made?
All sums realised by way of penalties under the SEBI Act shall be credited to the __________________
According to Sales of Goods Act, 1930 “ mercantile agent ” means a mercantile agent having in the customary course of business as such
Who is a sub-agent______________________________
The decision in the case of R Vs. Bedingfield was overruled in the case of ?
Who shall constitute the committee of creditors as per section 21 of the IBC?
To be a member of the House of People, minimum age prescribed is:
When is there an abuse of dominant position as per the Competition Act?