Given the statements:

- All Dunzo are Zepto.
- All Zepto are Zomato.
- Some Zomato is not Otipy.
- No Otipy is a Drink prime.

Analyze the following conclusions and identify which one definitely logically does NOT follow from the statements:

Question

Given the statements:

- All Dunzo are Zepto.
- All Zepto are Zomato.
- Some Zomato is not Otipy.
- No Otipy is a Drink prime.

Analyze the following conclusions and identify which one definitely logically does NOT follow from the statements:

Accepted Answer

**Solution:**

1. **Given Statements:**
   - All Dunzo are Zepto.
   - All Zepto are Zomato.
   - Some Zomato is not Otipy.
   - No Otipy is a Drink prime.

2. **Analyze each conclusion:**

(a) *Some Drink prime are not Otipy.*
   - Since no Otipy is a Drink prime, it means all Drink prime are not Otipy.
   - Hence, this conclusion definitely follows.

(b) *All Zomato being Zepto is a possibility.*
   - Given all Zepto are Zomato, it is possible that all Zomato are Zepto (reverse inclusion is possible).
   - So, this conclusion is possible.

(c) *Some Zepto are Dunzo.*
   - Given all Dunzo are Zepto, so at least some Zepto are Dunzo.
   - This conclusion follows.

(d) *Some Zomato is Dunzo.*
   - Since all Dunzo are Zepto and all Zepto are Zomato, Dunzo is a subset of Zomato.
   - So, some Zomato are Dunzo.
   - This conclusion follows.

(e) *No Dunzo is Zomato.*
   - Given all Zepto are Zomato and all Dunzo are Zepto, so all Dunzo are Zomato.
   - Hence, "No Dunzo is Zomato" contradicts the statements.
   - This conclusion definitely does NOT follow.

**Answer:** (e) No Dunzo is Zomato.

Answer

Answer

Answer

Answer