Statement Conclusions – MBA CET questions with solutions

Approach: A conclusion must follow from the statement itself — no outside assumptions.

Solution:
Conclusion I: The statement says only that the distance and the fuel bill fall. Total transport cost by sea (ships, ports, handling, time) is not compared with road, so 'sea transport is cheaper' is a broader claim than the data — it does not follow beyond reasonable doubt.
Conclusion II: The statement presents the fuel saving as the whole point of switching to sea transport, so the aim of saving fuel is taken as given → II follows.
Hence only II follows → option (2).

Why the other options are wrong: (1) and (5) need I, which compares total costs the statement never gives; (3) is for complementary pairs; (4) ignores the fuel-saving purpose.

Cetking shortcut: In CET, a conclusion that generalises (‘X is cheaper than Y’) from one specific case is usually rejected.

Answer: B

Approach: Statement–conclusion read in the setter's intended sense: the example is offered to illustrate the rule.

Solution:
Statement: organised people find time for rest; Rutuja, despite a very busy schedule, finds time for rest.
Conclusion I: Rutuja is presented as managing rest in spite of a heavy schedule — the hallmark of the organised person the first line describes → I is taken to follow.
Conclusion II: 'Very busy schedule' directly tells us she works hard → she is industrious → II follows.
Hence both follow → option (5).

Why the other options are wrong: (1) ignores the clear 'very busy schedule' clue for II; (2) ignores the link between the rule and the example; (3) applies only to complementary pairs; (4) rejects both stated clues.

Note: In a pure syllogism question, 'All organised → rest' cannot be reversed; this item is framed as a statement–conclusion, where the intended reading accepts I.

Answer: E

Approach: Statement–conclusion: accept what follows directly; reject extreme or unsupported claims.

Solution:
Statement: the old order changed, making way for the new.
I: 'Change is the law of nature' — the statement is a classic expression of exactly this idea ⇒ follows.
II: 'Discard old ideas because they are old' — the statement says old was replaced, not that age alone is a reason to discard. Extreme ⇒ does not follow.

Why the other options are wrong:
B/E: II is an extreme prescription. C: I and II are not complementary. D: I clearly follows.

Answer: A

Approach: Must-be-true check — a conclusion is valid only if the facts force it.

Solution: Facts: 4 vehicles, 2 are red, 1 is a minivan.
I. Red minivan — the minivan may or may not be one of the red ones → not certain.
II. 3 cars — the other vehicles could be bikes, trucks etc. → not certain.
III. Favourite colour red — nothing is said about preferences → not certain.
None of the three must be true.

Why the other options are wrong: A, B, C, D each claim at least one statement is certain, but every statement is only possible, not forced.

Cetking shortcut: 'Must be true' ≠ 'could be true' — if you can imagine one case where it fails, reject it.

Answer: E

Approach: Statement–Conclusion: accept only what must be true from the given facts.

Solution: Facts: buildings have 2 to 8 floors; any building with more than three floors has a lift.
(a) 'All floors may be reached by lifts' – a 2- or 3-floor building need not have a lift, so this does not follow.
(b) 'Only floors above the third have lifts' – a lift in a 5-floor building serves all its floors; not stated.
(c) 'Seventh floors have lifts' – a building with a 7th floor has more than three floors, so it must have a lift – follows.
(d) 'Second floors do not have lifts' – a second floor in an 8-floor building has a lift; does not follow.

Why the other options are wrong:
A, B – (a) and (b) go beyond the facts.
D, E – (d) is false for tall buildings.

Cetking shortcut: Pick the conclusion that needs only the 'more than three floors → lift' rule.

Answer: C

Approach: Statement–Conclusion: a 'may be' list of possibilities does not prove any one of them.

Solution: The statement says a cousin may be a sister's son, uncle's son or brother's son – several possibilities.
Conclusion I (sister's son) – only one possibility, not certain → does not follow.
Conclusion II (uncle's son) – also only one possibility → does not follow.
Since there are three possibilities, I and II do not cover all cases, so 'either I or II' also fails. Neither follows → option (d).

Why the other options are wrong:
(a), (b), (c) – neither conclusion is definite.
(e) – 'either–or' needs I and II to be the only two possibilities; a third (brother's son) exists.

Cetking shortcut: 'May be' + a list of 3 or more choices → usually 'neither follows'.

Answer: D