** Present perfect ("have done") in direct speech becomes **past perfect ("had done")** in indirect speech. Pronoun "I" changes to "he." Option (a) repeats direct speech. Option (b) keeps "has done," breaking tense sequence. Option (c) keeps "I," which is incorrect. Thus, (d) is correct. ---

** In reported speech, "we" (the professor + team) → "they." Present perfect "have come" → past perfect "had come." Present "is life" → past "was life." Option (a) wrongly changes "our" to "your." Option (b) changes "is life" into "had been life," altering meaning. Option (d) mixes pronouns incorrectly. Hence, option (c) is correct. ---

** Imperative sentences with "please" in reported speech change into **"requested" + object + infinitive."** "This" shifts to "that." Option (a) ("ordered") is wrong because polite requests are not orders. Option (b) ("threatened") is illogical. Option (c) is just a repetition of direct speech. Hence, option (d) is correct. ---

** In **reported speech**, "is" changes to "was." The demonstrative "this" changes to "that." Hence: "it is clear…this is" → "it was clear…that was." Option (a) uses past perfect incorrectly. Option (b) keeps "is," breaking tense sequence. Option (d) wrongly introduces "must be clear," altering meaning. Thus, (c) is correct. ---

** Past continuous in direct speech ("was watching") becomes **past perfect continuous** ("had been watching") in reported speech. Option (a) wrongly keeps past continuous. Options (b) and (d) wrongly change subject to "I," making it sound like the narrator was watching TV. Hence, (c) is correct. ---

** In **reported speech**, "will" becomes "would." None of the modal verbs "should," "could," or "ought to" express the same definite intention as "will." Option (a) implies obligation, option (b) implies possibility, option (c) implies moral duty. Only (d) preserves Rohan's commitment. ---

** In **reported speech**, "will" changes to "would." Also, "you" becomes "me" when addressed directly. Option (a) incorrectly adds "be able to," which changes the meaning. Option (b) keeps "will" in future tense — incorrect with past reporting verb. Option (c) uses "would be seeing," which suggests a continuous sense not in the original. Hence, (d) is the correct transformation. ---

** This is an **exclamatory sentence** converted into indirect speech. "Exclaimed with joy" is correct for positive emotion. Present tense "is" shifts to past "was." Option (a) keeps "is" without tense change. Option (b) changes structure and drops "how," which alters emphasis. Option (d) is grammatically correct but not faithful to the exact exclamation style. Hence, (c) is the most accurate. ---

** This is a **yes/no question in reported speech**. Such questions require "if" or "whether," and the verb tense shifts back. Present tense "is" changes to past tense "was." Option (a) is ungrammatical ("is the door close" is wrong). Option (b) fails because "is" stays in present tense. Option (c) wrongly shifts pronoun and sense — it implies Aamir closed the door, which alters meaning. Hence, option (d) is correct. ---

** This is a **universal truth/general fact**. In reported speech, universal truths remain in the **present tense**. "Man is mortal" is a universal fact, so it stays as "is mortal." Option (a) changes singular "man" to plural "men," altering meaning. Option (b) wrongly uses "instructed," which is not suitable here. Option (c) changes tense to past ("was mortal"), which is incorrect because universal truths do not shift tense. Thus, option (d) is correct. ---