The question given below consists of a statement followed by three arguments numbered I II and III Y...........

Logical Reasoning(SBI-PO) Statement - Arguments

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: World’s largest beer maker Heineken NV, the majority partner of United Breweries with Vijay Mallya, is understood to have sought legal opinion over its right to appoint a chairman at the Indian company. Heineken and some of its advisers believe that the shareholder agreement between Mallya and the beer giant has become null and void after India’s Enforcement Directorate attached his shares as part of its legal action against the liquor baron. Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner?

Arguments:

I. UBL has stopped sharing confidential information with Mallya and has said that he is no longer privy to any strategic developments.

II. The board of UBL, India’s biggest beer company, had asked Mallya to either step down or appoint a nominee after the Securities and Exchange Board of India barred wilful defaulters from holding key board positions last year.

III. The company is functioning well and operations are in good shape but it is not good corporate governance to have an acting chairman for so long.

None is strong.

Only I and II are strong.

Only III is strong.

All except III and II are strong.

All are strong.

छोटे Courses बड़े Results

Master Statement - Arguments

Prepare through Micro-courses

Try Now

Explanation:

Ans. 4. The correct answer is option 4, i.e. All except III and II are strong, i.e. only I is strong. We first make sure to read the statement carefully and then see what immediate inferences can be drawn based on our first reading. The next step is to look at the arguments given in the options, analyze them and see if they seem relevant with respect to the information/data provided to us. Finally, it is very important to study the question closely. The above statement deals with the fact that world’s largest beer maker Heineken NV is looking for a new Chairman. Argument (II) can be rejected as it explicitly states the fact that India barred willful defaulters from holding key positions last year, then why such a step is being taken at this point of time. It is thus, not relevant and can be rejected. Argument (III) can be eliminated as answer choice as it states the fact that the company is functioning well and is in good shape. It is somewhat vague and moreover, not directed in the same sense as the given statement. The issue is with the new Chairman. Argument (I) is the most appropriate assumption based on the facts stated. It sheds light on to the fact that since, Heineken is looking for a new Chairman and is breaking all links with Vijay Mallya, and as a result has stopped sharing confidential information, a move indicating the action of searching or looking for a new Chairman. Thus, option 4 captures the correct arguments that support the statement in the best possible manner and is our answer choice. Hence, rest of the options can be rejected.