NABKISAN Finance Limited, which issued India's first WASH social bond, is a subsidiary of which institution?

The correct answer is ₹180 crore. NABKISAN Finance Limited, a subsidiary of NABARD, placed India's first social bond meant only for water, sanitation and hygiene work, and investors bid for 1.8 times the paper on offer. That demand allowed the company to mobilise ₹180 crore, which will be lent for safe water, toilets and hygiene services in villages and in pockets that lenders normally skip. Option A, ₹90 crore, is half the real figure and matches nothing in the issue. Option C, ₹250 crore, and option D, ₹360 crore, are larger round sums that were never raised; the issue closed at the stated amount even though demand ran ahead of it. Candidates should fix the amount alongside the other terms of the paper, namely a tenure of five years, a coupon of 8.10% a year, redemption in September 2031 and the top domestic rating of AAA (Stable) from both CRISIL and CARE.

The correct answer is 8.10% a year. The bond that NABKISAN listed on the National Stock Exchange in Mumbai runs for five years and pays this rate to its holders until it is redeemed in September 2031. Two rating agencies, CRISIL and CARE, judged the paper to be of the highest domestic quality and marked it AAA with a stable outlook, which is why a rate at this level drew bids worth 1.8 times the amount on offer and let the company collect ₹180 crore. Options A and B, at 7.10% and 7.75%, are lower than the rate actually promised, while option D at 8.60% is higher; none of these was offered. For the examination, pair the coupon with the tenure, the maturity month, the oversubscription and the amount raised, since questions on a bond issue usually test one of those five figures.

The correct answer is only under a written order of the court recording a special cause. The Act allows the contents of a banker's book to be proved by a certified copy without producing the original, so an officer is not ordinarily compelled to appear, and it protects officers from routine appearance where the bank is not a party. The Act then lists what counts as special cause: uncertainty about the accuracy or authenticity of an entry, an interruption in the regularity of record keeping, or the bank's failure to comply with an earlier court order on inspection or production. Option A ignores that protection entirely. Option C brings in an approval that the Act does not require. Option D states a circumstance rather than the legal test, so it too is wrong.

The correct answer is the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891. The new Act carries the same name with the new year and takes the place of the colonial-era statute, which was framed at a time when banking systems were entirely paper-based. Option B is wrong because the Indian Evidence Act is a general law of evidence and is not the statute being replaced here. Option C is wrong because the Banking Regulation Act governs the regulation of banking companies rather than the admissibility of their records as evidence. Option D is wrong because the Negotiable Instruments Act deals with cheques, bills of exchange and promissory notes. Candidates should pair the two years in memory, the old law of 1891 and the new one of 2026, since questions are usually framed on that replacement.

The correct answer is 1 October 2026. The backgrounder states plainly that the Act comes into force on that date and replaces the older law of the same name from then. Option A, the first day of the financial year, is the standard distractor for any commencement question and is wrong here. Option C moves the date into the next calendar year and is also wrong, as is option D, which uses a national date that has no connection with this statute. Commencement dates are among the most frequently asked details about a new law, so note both the date and the fact that the new framework applies from it to legal proceedings, arbitration and investigations where banking records are produced as evidence.