Assertion: When inductive and electromeric effects operate in oppsite directions, the inductive effect predominates.
Reason: Inductive effect is the complete transfer of shared pair of `pi` electrons to one of the atoms.

Options

A. If both assertion and reason are true and reason is the correct explanation of assertion
B. If both assertion and reason are true but reason is not the correct explanation of assertion
C. If assertion is true but reason is false.
D. If both assertion and reason are false.

Explanation

To solve the assertion and reason question, we will analyze both the assertion and the reason step by step.

### Step 1: Understanding the Assertion
The assertion states: "When inductive and electromeric effects operate in opposite directions, the inductive effect predominates."

- **Inductive Effect**: This is the permanent effect observed in saturated compounds where electron density is shifted along the sigma bonds due to the presence of electronegative atoms or groups. For example, if a carbon chain has a chlorine atom attached, the chlorine will pull electron density towards itself, creating a partial positive charge on the carbon atom.

- **Electromeric Effect**: This is a temporary effect that occurs in compounds with multiple bonds (like alkenes or alkynes) where there is a complete transfer of a pair of pi electrons to one of the atoms in response to an attacking reagent. This effect is more pronounced when there is a polarizing influence.

### Step 2: Analyzing the Reason
The reason states: "Inductive effect is the complete transfer of shared pair of pi electrons to one of the atoms."

- This statement is incorrect. The inductive effect does not involve the complete transfer of pi electrons; rather, it involves the shifting of sigma electrons due to electronegativity differences. The complete transfer of electrons is characteristic of the electromeric effect, not the inductive effect.

### Step 3: Conclusion
Since the assertion claims that the inductive effect predominates when both effects operate in opposite directions, and the reason incorrectly defines the inductive effect, we conclude that:

- The assertion is **false**.
- The reason is **false**.

### Final Answer
Both the assertion and the reason are false.