In a test, Randhir obtained more marks than the total marks obtained by Kunal and Debu. The total marks obtained by Kunal and Shankar are more than those of Randhir. Sonal obtained more marks than Shankar. Neha obtained more marks than Randhir. Who amongst them obtained highest marks?

Let's denote the marks obtained by each person as R (Randhir), K (Kunal), D (Debu), S (Shankar), So (Sonal), and N (Neha). From the statements, we have the following inequalities: 1. R > K + D 2. K + S > R 3. So > S 4. N > R Analyzing these statements: * From (4), N > R. This immediately tells us Randhir did not obtain the highest marks. So, option A is incorrect. * We need to compare Neha (N) and Sonal (So) to determine the highest scorer. * We know N > R. * We know So > S. * We also know K + S > R. This implies that S could be greater than R, or K could be greater than R, or both contribute. If S is greater than R, then Sonal (So > S) could potentially be greater than Randhir. However, there is no information that directly or indirectly compares Neha's marks (N) with Sonal's marks (So). Let's consider two scenarios: Scenario 1: Let R = 100. N > 100 (e.g., N = 120) K + S > 100 (e.g., K = 10, S = 100) So > S (e.g., So = 110) In this scenario, Neha (120) is the highest. Scenario 2: Let R = 100. N > 100 (e.g., N = 110) K + S > 100 (e.g., K = 10, S = 150) So > S (e.g., So = 160) In this scenario, Sonal (160) is the highest. Since we can construct valid scenarios where either Neha or Sonal obtains the highest marks, and there's no definitive relationship established between N and So, the data provided is inadequate to determine who obtained the highest marks. The final answer is D) Data are inadequate.