JUDGMENT 1. - This miscellaneous appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen' Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter 'the 1923 Act') has been filed against the award dated 18-8-2007 passed by the Workmen' Compensation Commissioner, Dausa (hereinafter 'the Commissioner'), whereby the Commissioner has found the respondents No.1 to5- claimants (hereinafter 'the claimants') entitled to compensation for a sum of Rs. 4,33,820/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of accident i.e. 23-1-2001 till the date of payment of compensation. 2. The facts of the case are that Laxmi Narayan at the relevant time on 23-1-2001 was working as helper with the respondent company Om Metal Limited (hereinafter 'the Om Metal'). Om Metal had taken a contract for work at Kureu Hydraulic Electric Project, Bhutan. Laxmi Narayan was employed in the said project by Om Metal. In the course of discharging his duties as helper at the aforesaid project, on 23-1-2001 Laxmi Narayan was alleged to have suffered an electric shock and died thereof. In the circumstances, a claim for compensation was laid before the Commissioner Jaipur by the widow, parents and two minor children of Laxmi Narayan stating that the deceased Laxmi Narayan was 24 years of age and earning Rs. 1000/- per day at the relevant time. Compensation was accordingly demanded under the 1923 Act from the non claimants employer Om Metal, and non claimant insurance company now the appellant. Reply to claim petition was filed by Om Metal, the employer. It was stated that Laxmi Narayan had not died as a result of any electric shock, but the natural cause of cardiac arrest and as such neither the company Om Metal nor its insurer the appellant company was liable to pay any compensation as claimed. The appellant insurance company on its part also opposed the claim petition stating that as Laxmi Narayan had died on 23-1-2001 because of a cardiac arrest - A natural cause - Without any connection with the alleged electric shock in the course of employment. Therefore neither the company Om Metal nor its insurer the insurance company was liable to pay compensation. Reference was made to the post mortem report of Laxmi Narayan to contend that the cause of death was cardiac arrest not relatable to the employment of Laxmi Narayan as helper with the company Om Metal. 3. Therefore neither the company Om Metal nor its insurer the insurance company was liable to pay compensation. Reference was made to the post mortem report of Laxmi Narayan to contend that the cause of death was cardiac arrest not relatable to the employment of Laxmi Narayan as helper with the company Om Metal. 3. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Commissioner framed four issues. Of relevance to this appeal is the issue as to whether the insurance company, now the appellant, as insurer of 50 workers of Om Metal on its project at Bhutan is liable to pay compensation to the claimants as the dependents of the deceased Laxmi Narayan? 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there was no evidence of any probative worth before the Commissioner to establish that Laxmi Narayan's death on 23-1-12001 was owing to an electric shock in the course of his employment with the company Om Metal at its project at Bhutan. She submitted that the post mortem report of Laxmi Narayan filed in support of the claim petition indicated the cause of death of Laxmi Narayan as cardiac arrest. The post mortem report did not reflect any external burn injuries/ singeing as would have been occasioned in the event Laxmi Narayan had suffered a high voltage fatal electric shock. Counsel further submitted that no evidence of any medical expert was brought on record before the Commissioner to establish that cardiac arrest, which was the cause of death of Laxmi Narayan, was the result of an electric shock. It was argued that in this view of the matter there was no causal link between the death of deceased Laxmi Narayan on 23-1-2001 and his employment as helper at the project of the insured at Bhutan on 23-1-2001. Counsel for the appellant also drew the attention of this court to the impugned award passed by the Commissioner, wherein the Commissioner has held that the cause of death of Laxmi Narayana as indicated in the post mortem report i.e. cardiac arrest might have been caused by an electric shock. On this, it has been submitted that in arriving at a finding of fact, a quasi judicial body, as the Commissioner is, is bound to solely rely on evidence of probative worth and not proceed on speculation or conjecture as was done by the Commissioner. On this, it has been submitted that in arriving at a finding of fact, a quasi judicial body, as the Commissioner is, is bound to solely rely on evidence of probative worth and not proceed on speculation or conjecture as was done by the Commissioner. In this view of the matter the impugned award be quashed and set aside, argued the appellant's counsel. 5. Mr. Amit Mathur, appearing on behalf of respondents claimants, has submitted that there was ample evidence on record before the Commissioner that Laxmi Narayan had died on 23-1-2001 of a cardiac arrest as a result of the electric shock suffered by him in the course of his employment with the company Om Metal as a helper on its project at Bhutan. He submitted that the cardiac arrest was only a consequence of electric shock and this was buttressed from the unshaken evidence of co-workers of Laxmi Narayan. Counsel submitted that in the circumstances, the Commissioner collated the evidence of the post mortem report indicating the cause of death of Laxmi Narayan as cardiac arrest with the evidence of co-workers that Laxmi Narayan suffered an electric shock while he was working at the project of company Om Metal at Bhutan on 23-1-2001 and rightly came to a conclusion that Laxmi Narayan had died of cardiac arrest caused by a massive electric shock. 6. Heard. Considered. Perused the impugned award passed by the Commissioner. 7. It is well settled that a quasi judicial body is obliged to arrive at a finding of fact on the basis of appreciation of evidence on record. A possible view on the evidence on record leading to a finding of fact based thereon is not liable to be interfered with by an appellate court. But a conclusion of fact by the Commissioner perverse to the evidence on record or based on no evidence is an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction and warrants exercise of appellate power by the court under Section 30 of the 1923 Act. A bare look at the impugned award dated 18-8-2007 indicates that the Commissioner's finding of fact with regard to the cause of death of Laxmi Narayan was speculative and conjectural. The Commissioner perversely held that cardiac arrest might have been caused by an electric shock. Assumption, cannot substitute evidence for a finding of fact. A bare look at the impugned award dated 18-8-2007 indicates that the Commissioner's finding of fact with regard to the cause of death of Laxmi Narayan was speculative and conjectural. The Commissioner perversely held that cardiac arrest might have been caused by an electric shock. Assumption, cannot substitute evidence for a finding of fact. The Commissioner could not have arrived on his own ipse dixit to the conclusion that Laxmi Narayan's cardiac arrest resulted from an electric shock without any evidence of a medical expert to that effect being on record. In doing so, the Commissioner erred in law. The error warrants the corrective processes of the appellate court. 8. Consequently, the award dated 18-8-2007 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner Dausa for re-addressing the issue of the causal link between the death of Laxmi Narayan in the accident of 23-1-2001 and his employment as helper with the Company Om Metal on its project at Bhutan. The parties are directed to appear before the jurisdictional Commissioner Dausa on November 15, 2014. 9. As the learned counsel for the claimants has submitted that the claimants are not in touch with him, the jurisdictional Commissioner Dausa is directed to issue notices to the claimants at the addresses recorded in the claim petition or the correct addresses, if so subsequently filed before him.The miscellaneous appeal stands accordingly allowed.Appeal Allowed. *******