Question

Vishnu Raman was an Indian magistrate who lived about a hundred years ago. He was famed for the

fairness of his judgements. One day while the magistrate was walking through the market he saw a crowd

outside a poultry shop. On enquiring what the matter was he learnt that a worker had accidentally dropped a

heavy sack on a chicken, crushing it to death. The chicken was small, worth only about five rupees, but the

owner of the shop had caught the worker by his throat and was demanding a hundred rupees. His argument

was that the chicken would have grown into a plump bird in another two years and then it would have

fetched him the amount he was asking for. Somebody in the crowd recognized the magistrate, and

everybody made way for him.

“Judge our case, your honour!” said the owner of the chicken, letting go of the worker and bowing

respectfully to the magistrate. “This man, through his carelessness has caused the death of a chicken that

would have fetched me a hundred coins in another two years!” Fear had made the worker’s speech

incoherent. Nobody could understand what he was saying. “The price put on the chicken is hundred rupees”,

said the magistrate, to the worker. “I advise you to pay the owner.” There was a gasp from the crowd.

Everybody had expected the magistrate to favour the poor worker. The owner of the chicken was overjoyed.

“They said you were fair in your judgements” he said, rubbing his hands in glee, “Now I can say there is no

one fairer than you!”

“The Law is always fair”, smiled the magistrate. “Tell me, how much grain a chicken would eat in a year?

"About half a sack”, said the poultry shop owner. “So in two years the chicken who died would have eaten a

whole sack of grain”, said Vishnu Raman. “Please give the sack of grain you’ve saved to the worker.” The

chicken owner turned pale. A sack of grain would cost more than hundred rupees. Frightened by the shouts

from the crowd, he declared he would not take any money from the worker, and retreated into the safety of

his shop in the end.

Attempt the following questions on the basis of the passage you have read:

(1). Where did the above scene take place?

a. In the court room.

b. Inside the shop of the poultry owner.

c. In the dairy farm.

d. At the house of the magistrate.

e. Outside the poultry shop.

(2). What was Vishnu Raman well known for?

a. He was well known for his respectable position.

b. He was well known for his honesty.

c. He was well known for his fairness of judgements.

d. He was well known for time management.

e. None of these

(3). In the end, the owner turned pale because -

1. The magistrate was being unjust.

2. He realised that he was being cheated.

3. The magistrate asked him to give the worker a sack of grain.a. Only 1

b. Only 2

c. Only 3

d. Only 1 and 2

e. Only 2 and 3

(4). What was the commotion in the market about?

a. The worker quiting his job.

b. The shop owner beating the magistrate.

c. The magistrate’s visit to the market.

d. The death of a chicken.

e. The missing money from the owner’s shop.

(5). Why was the shop owner asking for a hundred rupees?

a. The worker could afford to pay him.

b. The worker purposely killed the chicken.

c. He was a greedy man.

d. He wanted to sell the chicken for a hundred rupees.

e. It would cost that much to buy another chicken.

(6). Why did the shop owner not accept any money from the worker in the end?

a. He felt genuinely sorry for the worker.

b. He had forgiven the worker as it was a mistake.

c. He was a fair man.

d. He wanted to impress the magistrate.

e. None of these

(7). How did the chicken die?

a. The chicken was a sickly bird.

b. The chicken was a sickly bird.

c. A worker accidently dropped a heavy sack on it.

d. The shop owner killed it to be sold as meat.

e. The chicken was cursed by the magistrate.

(8). Why was the owner asked to give a sack of grain to the worker?

a. The worker could not afford grain.

b. The worker had purchased the sack of grain.

c. The worker did not get paid for his services

d. A sack of grain was equal to a hundred rupees.

e. He would have saved on a sack of grain.

(9). Why was the owner of the shop initially overjoyed with the magistrate’s judgement?

a. The magistrate asked the worker to pay him a hundred rupees.

b. He was fond of the magistrate.

c. He did not expect the magistrate to favour the worker.

d. He could now buy another chicken.

e. The law is always fair.

(10). What could be an appropriate title of the story?

a. The Fair Magistrate

b. The Unfortunate Worker

c. The Selfish Worker

d. The Bag of Grains

e. The Market Place​

Answer 1

Answer:

1. option b

2.option c

3.only 1

4. option d

5. option c

6. option e

7. option c

8. option e

9. option a

10. open a

hope l am not wrong and if l am correct please mark me brilliant

Answer 2

the fair magistratenan