Assertion: Every mutual intraction between two bodies always follow the action-reaction law.
Reason: Single isolated force without reaction is not possible.

Options

A. If both assertion `&` Reason are True `&` the Reason is a corrrect explanation of the Asserion.
B. If both Assertion `&` Reason are True but Reason is not correct explanation of the Assertion.
C. If Assertion is Trie but the Reason is False.
D. If both Assertion `&` Reason are false

Explanation

To analyze the given assertion and reason, we will break down the concepts of Newton's laws of motion, particularly focusing on the action-reaction law.

### Step-by-Step Solution:

1. **Understanding the Assertion**:
- The assertion states that "Every mutual interaction between two bodies always follows the action-reaction law."
- According to Newton's Third Law of Motion, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that when two bodies interact, the force exerted by one body on the other is met with an equal force exerted back on the first body by the second body.

2. **Examining the Reason**:
- The reason provided is "Single isolated force without reaction is not possible."
- This statement aligns with Newton's Third Law, which implies that forces always come in pairs. If a body exerts a force (action), there must be a corresponding reaction force acting in the opposite direction.

3. **Analyzing the Relationship**:
- The assertion and reason are interconnected. The assertion describes a fundamental principle of interactions, while the reason explains why this principle holds true.
- Since every interaction involves forces that are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction, the reason supports the assertion.

4. **Conclusion**:
- Both the assertion and the reason are true. The reason correctly explains the assertion as it emphasizes that forces cannot exist in isolation without a corresponding reaction.

5. **Final Answer**:
- Therefore, the correct option is that both the assertion and reason are true, and the reason is the correct explanation for the assertion.