Q1. How many fields did the farmer own initially?
A. One
B. Two
C. Three
D. Four
Q2. Who did the farmer buy the well from?
A. His brother
B. His neighbour
C. The village chief
D. A merchant
Q3. The cunning neighbour claimed the water in the well still belonged to him because:
A. The farmer had not paid
B. He sold only the well, not the water in it
C. The well dried up
D. The farmer broke the agreement
Q4. Where did the Panchayat members gather for the meeting?
A. The farmer's house
B. The temple
C. Under the banyan tree in the centre of the village
D. The town square
Q5. Who was the leader of the village mentioned in the story?
A. The judge
B. The village chief (a woman)
C. The king
D. The neighbour
Q6. What was the Panchayat's judgment about the water?
A. The neighbour can keep the water
B. If the neighbour owns the water, he must remove it from the farmer's well or the water belongs to the well's owner
C. The water belongs to no one
D. The farmer must return the well
Q7. How did the farmer react to the judgment?
A. He cried
B. He appealed to the king
C. He gave a shout of joy
D. He paid the neighbour
Q8. What punishment did the cunning neighbour receive?
A. He was sent to jail
B. He had to pay a fine and apologise
C. He lost all his fields
D. He had to leave the village
Q9. How did the neighbour feel after the judgment?
A. Happy
B. He realised cheating will not lead anywhere
C. He planned to appeal
D. He was proud
Q10. What did the villagers praise after the judgment?
A. The farmer
B. The Panchayat's wisdom
C. The neighbour's cleverness
D. The village chief
Q11. Why was the neighbour's argument ('I sold the well, not the water') considered clever but ultimately flawed?
A. It was a bad argument
B. It seemed logical initially, but the Panchayat turned it against him—if he owns the water, he has no right to store it in someone else's property
C. The argument was ignored
D. The Panchayat agreed with him
Q12. What does the Panchayat's judgment demonstrate?
A. That villagers are uneducated
B. That justice can be achieved through community wisdom and logical reasoning rather than force or wealth
C. That courts are unnecessary
D. That the farmer was wrong
Q13. Why did the farmer go to the village Panchayat instead of fighting with the neighbour?
A. He was afraid
B. He understood that disputes should be resolved through proper community institutions rather than direct conflict
C. He had no money
D. He wanted to make peace
Q14. What does 'the cunning man realised that cheating will not lead anywhere' teach us?
A. Cheating sometimes works
B. Dishonest schemes ultimately backfire—the neighbour's cleverness became the tool of his own punishment
C. Honesty is not always best
D. Neighbours should not sell wells
Q15. How did the village chief's judgment use the neighbour's own argument against him?
A. By ignoring his argument
B. She agreed that the neighbour owned the water, then logically concluded he had no right to keep it in another person's well—forcing him to either remove it or lose it
C. By calling witnesses
D. By denying his claim entirely
Q16. What is the central theme of 'The Decision of the Panchayat'?
A. The importance of farming
B. The power of wit and logical reasoning to deliver justice; community institutions can resolve disputes fairly
C. Village life is complicated
D. Neighbours should not sell property to each other
Q17. How does the story illustrate the concept of community justice?
A. By showing courts are needed
B. The Panchayat—a community institution—provides fair, logical, and wise justice without involving any external authority
C. Justice is impossible in villages
D. The village chief is always right
Q18. What makes the village chief's solution elegant?
A. It uses force
B. It uses the neighbour's own argument against him—if the water is his, it cannot legally remain in someone else's property—turning cleverness into justice
C. It ignores the neighbour's point
D. It makes everyone happy immediately
Q19. What does the term 'village chief' being a woman suggest?
A. Women cannot lead
B. The story presents a progressive view where women can hold positions of authority and wisdom in community governance
C. The village is unusual
D. Women are always wiser
Q20. If the neighbour had actually removed all the water from the well, what would that imply for the practical situation?
A. The farmer would win
B. It is practically impossible to remove all water from a well, so the only real option was to accept the judgment and acknowledge the water belongs to the well's owner
C. The neighbour would win
D. The water would dry up
Q21. Multiple Select: What does the Panchayat system represent according to this story?
A. A community institution for dispute resolution
B. A system based on collective wisdom rather than individual authority
C. A court with full legal powers
D. A place where all villagers vote on punishments
Q22. Multiple Select: Which qualities does the village chief demonstrate in the story?
A. Wisdom in understanding the logical implication of the neighbour's own claim
B. Fairness by hearing both sides before judging
C. Fear of the cunning neighbour
D. Decisiveness in delivering a clear judgment
Q23. Multiple Select: What are the consequences of the neighbour's dishonesty?
A. He had to pay a fine
B. He had to apologise to the farmer
C. He gained the water permanently
D. He realised cheating does not work
Q24. Evaluate the fairness of the Panchayat's judgment. Does the judgment correctly use legal logic?
A. No, it was unfair
B. Yes—it applied the neighbour's own legal claim consistently: if you own the water but not the well, you must remove the water, making storage in another's property illegal; this is logically and legally consistent
C. No, the farmer should have lost
D. The judgment was random
Q25. What broader lesson about the design of legal arguments does this story teach?
A. Legal arguments always work
B. A seemingly clever legal argument can be turned against the person who makes it if the logic is followed to its full conclusion—showing that exploiting legal loopholes can backfire
C. Legal arguments never work
D. Only educated people can make legal arguments
Q26. Why is the Panchayat system described as effective in this story compared to going to a king's court?
A. The Panchayat is less formal
B. The Panchayat knows local context, hears both sides fairly, and delivers community-accepted justice quickly—showing local institutions can be more effective for local disputes than distant formal courts
C. The Panchayat always favours farmers
D. Kings' courts are always corrupt
Q27. Multiple Select: Which elements contribute to the wisdom of the Panchayat's judgment?
A. Both sides were heard equally
B. The judgment used the neighbour's own claim against him
C. Physical force was threatened
D. The logical conclusion was followed to its natural outcome
Q28. Multiple Select: How does the story demonstrate that wit and knowledge of logic are more valuable than physical or financial power in disputes?
A. The farmer had more money than the neighbour
B. The Panchayat used reasoning rather than force or financial consideration
C. The village chief was the most powerful person
D. The logic of the argument prevailed over the neighbour's cunning attempt to exploit ownership rules