Answer: C. stoke
Explanation:
The sentence says: “…the fire we lit was dimming down; hence I decided to _______ it a bit.”
• When a fire is dying down, we stoke it, meaning to add fuel or stir it to make it burn more strongly.
• Stoke (verb) means to feed and tend a fire, making it brighter/hotter.
Why other options are wrong:
• A. soak – भिगोना (to wet) – would extinguish the fire, not revive it.
• B. strike – मारना/आघात करना – we strike a match to start a fire, but not to keep it going.
• D. increase – बढ़ाना – grammatically possible but vague; “increase the fire” is not idiomatic.
Corrected sentence:
It was very cold outside, and the fire we lit was dimming down; hence I decided to stoke it a bit.
Grammar Rules:
• Verb Precision and Context: Choosing the most appropriate verb depends on the specific action described in the sentence’s context. The act of revitalizing a dimming fire by adding fuel or tending to it is best described by the verb “stoke.”

Answer: D. pilfering
Explanation:
The sentence describes a burglar taking a bottle of oil – a small item, not a large-scale theft.
• Pilfering means to steal small items of little value, often in a sneaky way.
• It fits perfectly with “a bottle of oil” (a small, petty theft).
Why other options are wrong:
• A. embezzling – गबन करना (stealing money/trusted funds, usually by someone in a position of trust) – not for a bottle of oil.
• B. frauding – This is not a standard English word; the correct verb is “defrauding.”
• C. swindling – ठगना (cheating someone out of money through deception) – not for a physical item like oil.
• E. looting – लूटपाट (stealing in large quantities, often during riots/disasters) – too large-scale for a bottle of oil.
Correct sentence:
Yesterday, the villagers caught a burglar pilfering a bottle of oil from the community hall.
Grammar Rules:
• Verb Precision and Context: Choosing the most appropriate verb depends on the specific action and context. “Pilfering” means to steal (typically things of relatively little value). Taking a single bottle of oil from a community hall fits this description perfectly.

Answer: E. All of the above
Explanation:
The sentence says: “The police commissioner condemned the _________ murder…”
All four options are adjectives that describe a murder as extremely shocking, horrifying, or terrible. They are all appropriate synonyms in this context.
• A. grisly – भयानक, खौफनाक (causing horror or disgust, especially due to violence).
• B. gruesome – क्रूर, भीषण (extremely unpleasant and shocking).
• C. ghastly – भयावह, डरावना (causing great horror or fear).
• D. horrifying – डरावना, भयानक (causing intense shock or fear).
Why all are correct:
Each word can be used to describe a violent or brutal murder. They are near-synonyms and all fit grammatically and contextually. The use of “condemned” and “apprehend” suggests a serious tone, so any of these words would work.
Correct sentences with each option:
• The police commissioner condemned the grisly murder…
• The police commissioner condemned the gruesome murder…
• The police commissioner condemned the ghastly murder…
• The police commissioner condemned the horrifying murder…
Grammar Rules:
• Synonyms and Connotation: All the words provided (grisly, gruesome, ghastly, horrifying) are synonyms that describe something unpleasant, dreadful, or causing horror, making them all suitable for describing a murder in this context. While there might be subtle differences in nuance, all are contextually appropriate.

Answer: A. revolting
• Adjective Precision and Context: The word must match the action described. The apparition stalked Reshma for days and threw her off a cliff – both actions are harmful, aggressive, and driven by ill will.
• Vindictive means having or showing a strong desire for revenge. This explains the prolonged stalking and the violent outcome perfectly.
• Benevolent means kind and helpful – opposite of the context.
• Magnanimous means generous and forgiving – does not fit.
• Callous means insensitive to others’ feelings – could describe a lack of emotion, but does not specifically explain the deliberate stalking and murderous act. It is also weaker in context than “vindictive.”
• Since only one word fits the hostile and vengeful context, “All of the above” is incorrect.
Why the other options are incorrect:
• Option (B) gratifying: “Gratifying” means giving pleasure or satisfaction. This is the opposite of the effect a rotten smell would have, especially one strong enough to cause unconsciousness.
• Option (C) captivating: “Captivating” means to attract and hold the attention or interest of someone; charming. This is also the opposite of the effect a rotten smell would have.
• Option (D) unappealing: “Unappealing” means not attractive or interesting. While a rotten smell is certainly unappealing, this word is too mild to describe a smell so strong that it causes unconsciousness. “Revolting” conveys a much stronger sense of disgust and nausea.
• Option (E) All of the above: This is incorrect as only one option is the most appropriate.
Therefore, the correct word to fill the blank is “revolting.”
Grammar Rules:
• Verb Precision and Context: Choosing the most appropriate verb depends on the specific action and context. The act of causing such extreme disgust that leads to unconsciousness is best described by the adjective “revolting,” which implies intense disgust or loathing. “Unappealing” is too weak for the described effect.

Correct answer: (A) vindictive
The sentence is:
The ________ apparition stalked Reshma for days and ultimately threw her off the cliff.
1. Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with an adjective because it describes the noun “apparition” (a ghost or spirit). Adjectives modify nouns and tell us what kind of person or thing is being referred to.
2. Context and logical consistency:
The apparition’s actions are:
• stalked Reshma for days (shows persistent, hostile behaviour)
• threw her off the cliff (shows violent, harmful intent)
Therefore, the adjective must indicate malice, revenge, or deliberate cruelty to logically explain both actions.
3. Evaluation of each option based on meaning:
• Vindictive – means having a strong desire for revenge. This fits perfectly because it explains why the apparition would follow her for days and then violently harm her.
• Benevolent – means kind and well-meaning. This is opposite to the context.
• Magnanimous – means generous and forgiving. This does not fit with harmful actions.
• Callous – means insensitive to others’ suffering. While it could describe someone cold, it does not explain deliberate stalking and murder. It is weaker and less precise than “vindictive.”
4. Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
Adjective (vindictive) + noun (apparition) + verb phrase (stalked… and threw).
The adjective correctly agrees with the singular noun and fits the past tense narrative.
Correct sentence:
The vindictive apparition stalked Reshma for days and ultimately threw her off the cliff.
Grammar Rules:
• Verb Precision and Context: Choosing the most appropriate adjective depends on the specific actions described in the sentence. The apparition’s actions of stalking “for days” and then causing harm (throwing off a cliff) strongly suggest a desire for revenge or punishment, which is best captured by the adjective “vindictive”.

Correct answer: (C) worked
The sentence is:
Having ______ in both government and private schools, Palak is the most suitable person to take over as the principal of the school.
Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with a past participle form of the verb because the sentence uses the perfect participle construction “Having + past participle” to indicate an action completed before the main clause. This structure shows that Palak has already completed the experience of working in both types of schools, and as a result of that experience, she is now suitable for the principal’s role.
Context and logical consistency:
The sentence describes a completed action (working in both government and private schools) that occurred before the present time. The perfect participle “Having worked” expresses that the action is finished and its result or relevance continues to the present moment, which is why she is qualified now.
Evaluation of each option based on grammatical structure:
• Worked – This is the past participle of “work” and fits perfectly in the pattern “Having + past participle.” It correctly indicates a completed action in the past that relates to the present outcome.
• Works – This is the simple present tense, third-person singular. It cannot be used after “Having” in this structure because “Having” requires a past participle, not a present tense verb.
• Working – This is the present participle. While it can appear in continuous forms, it does not follow “Having” to form the perfect participle construction. The correct form is “Having worked,” not “Having working.”
• Was working – This is the past continuous tense and cannot follow “Having” to create the required perfect participle phrase.
• Not Attempted – This is not a valid answer choice.
Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
Having + past participle (worked) + object phrase (in both government and private schools) + main clause (Palak is the most suitable person…).
The phrase “Having worked” acts as a participial phrase modifying the subject “Palak” and correctly establishes the cause-effect relationship between her past experience and her current suitability.
Grammar Rules:
Perfect Participle: The structure “Having + past participle (V3)” forms a perfect participle, indicating an action that has been completed before another action or a state of being. In this sentence, having “worked” in schools is a completed action that makes Palak suitable for the principal’s position. This construction implies a causal relationship or a preceding action.

Correct answer: (A) but
The sentence is:
A heavy storm was forecast _____ the weather was clear.
Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with a conjunction because it connects two contrasting clauses: “A heavy storm was forecast” and “the weather was clear.” The conjunction must show contrast or opposition between the prediction and the actual condition.
Context and logical consistency:
The sentence presents a contrast. The forecast predicted a heavy storm, but the actual weather was clear. This creates an unexpected or opposite situation. The conjunction must indicate this contrast clearly.
Evaluation of each option based on meaning:
• But – This is a contrasting conjunction. It shows that the forecast and the reality are opposite. This fits perfectly: heavy storm was forecast, but the weather was clear.
• Because – This is a cause-and-effect conjunction. It would mean the storm was forecast because the weather was clear, which is illogical.
• Unless – This is a conditional conjunction meaning “except if.” It does not fit because it would suggest that the forecast is conditional on the weather being clear, which is not the intended meaning.
• And – This is an additive conjunction. It would simply add information without contrast, which does not match the contradictory nature of the two clauses.
• Not Attempted – This is not a valid answer choice.
Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
Clause 1 (A heavy storm was forecast) + conjunction (but) + clause 2 (the weather was clear).
The conjunction “but” correctly connects two independent clauses showing contrast, and the sentence becomes: A heavy storm was forecast, but the weather was clear.

Correct answer: (D) must
The sentence is:
You _____ be mad if you think I’m going to lend you any more money.
Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with a modal verb because it expresses the speaker’s strong conviction or certainty about the other person’s mental state. The modal verb is followed by the base form of the verb “be.”
Context and logical consistency:
The speaker is expressing a strong opinion that the other person’s thinking is irrational. The tone is emphatic and shows the speaker’s firm belief that the idea is unreasonable. The modal verb must convey strong certainty or logical conclusion rather than possibility, obligation, or suggestion.
Evaluation of each option based on meaning:
• Must – This modal verb expresses strong certainty or logical deduction. The speaker is not simply guessing; they are firmly asserting that the other person is mad for thinking such a thing. This fits the tone of the sentence perfectly.
• Might – This modal expresses possibility or uncertainty. It would mean “It is possible that you are mad,” which weakens the force of the statement and does not match the emphatic tone of the speaker.
• Should – This modal expresses obligation or advice. It would mean “You are supposed to be mad,” which does not make logical sense here.
• Ought to – This is similar to “should” and expresses moral obligation or expectation. It does not fit the context of expressing certainty about someone’s mental state.
• Not Attempted – This is not a valid answer choice.
Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
Subject (You) + modal verb (must) + base verb (be) + complement (mad) + conditional clause (if you think…).
“Must” correctly functions as a modal verb followed by the base form “be,” and it expresses the speaker’s strong conviction.

Let’s look at how the given modal verbs are used:
• Ought to – When there is a strong sense of moral duty, advice, or indication of correc action.
Example: You ought to serve your motherland.
• Must- “Must” is a modal verb most commonly used to express certainty. It can also
be used to express necessity or strong recommendation, although native speakers prefer the more flexible form “have to.”.
Example: You must follow the instructions.
• Should- used to show obligation, duty, or correctness.
Example: One should obey one’s parents.
• Might- We use might most often to refer to weak possibility.
Example: I might go to Japan for a month to study Japanese.
• The sentence is expressing some kind of certainty. So ‘Must’ is used here.
The correct sentence is: You must be mad if you think I’m going to lend you any more money.

Correct answer: (D) would have seen
The sentence is:
If he had gone to Agra, he _____ the Taj Mahal.
Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with a verb phrase that completes the result clause of a conditional sentence. The structure is a third conditional (past unreal conditional), which describes an imaginary past situation and its imaginary result.
Context and logical consistency:
The sentence expresses an unreal past condition: “he had gone to Agra” (which he did not actually do). Therefore, the result is also unreal and describes what would have happened if the condition had been true. The verb phrase must match this hypothetical past situation.
Evaluation of each option based on grammatical structure:
• Would have seen – This is the correct structure for the result clause of a third conditional: would have + past participle. It correctly expresses that he would have seen the Taj Mahal if he had gone to Agra.
• Have been seen – This is grammatically incorrect in this context. It uses the wrong auxiliary and passive voice, which does not fit here.
• Saw – This is simple past tense. Third conditional requires would have + past participle, not simple past.
• Had been seen – This is past perfect passive. It is neither the correct structure nor the correct voice for the intended meaning.
• Not Attempted – This is not a valid answer choice.
Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
If + past perfect (had gone) + would have + past participle (seen).
The third conditional structure expresses a hypothetical past situation and its imaginary result. The completed sentence reads: If he had gone to Agra, he would have seen the Taj Mahal.

Example: I would have received a better grade on the exam if/ had studied harder.
• The speaker is imagining a scenario in which they didn’t put enough effort into their studies, which led to a poorer grade.
• Therefore, the complete sentence is: If he had gone to Agra, he would have seen the Taj Mahal.

Correct answer: (B) who
The sentence is:
The boy ____ came to see me this morning had come from Agra.
Role of the missing word:
The blank must be filled with a relative pronoun because it introduces a relative clause that describes “the boy.” The relative pronoun acts as the subject of the relative clause.
Context and logical consistency:
The relative clause is “____ came to see me this morning.” The pronoun needed here must refer to a person (the boy) and function as the subject of the verb “came.” Therefore, the relative pronoun must be a subject relative pronoun used for people.
Evaluation of each option based on grammatical function:
• Who – This is the correct relative pronoun for people when it acts as the subject of the relative clause. “Who came to see me this morning” correctly describes the boy.
• Which – This relative pronoun is used for things or animals, not for people. Using “which” for a person is grammatically incorrect.
• That – This can refer to people or things and can act as a subject, but in formal English, “who” is preferred when the antecedent is a person. While “that” is sometimes acceptable in informal usage, “who” is the most appropriate and grammatically precise choice here.
• Whom – This relative pronoun is used for people but only when it acts as the object of the verb or preposition, not as the subject. Here, “came” requires a subject, so “whom” is incorrect.
• Not Attempted – This is not a valid answer choice.
Grammar structure of the completed sentence:
Main clause: The boy … had come from Agra.
Relative clause: who came to see me this morning.
The relative pronoun “who” agrees with the singular antecedent “boy” and correctly functions as the subject of the verb “came.”
Grammar Rules:
• Relative Pronouns: “Who” is a relative pronoun used to refer to people, acting as the subject of a relative clause. “Whom” is used as the object. “Which” is used for things or animals. “That” can be used for people or things, but “who” is the specific pronoun for people acting as the subject.
• In the clause “____ came to see me this morning,” the blank is the subject of the verb “came,” referring to “the boy”. Hence, “who” is the correct choice.