Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:

1. The timeline for filing a written statement in a commercial suit begins from the date the plaintiff rectifies any deficiencies in court fees, rather than from the date of service of summons (!) (!) .

2. The defect of non-payment or partial payment of court fees at the time of filing the suit does not prevent the suit from being properly instituted once the deficiency is rectified within the permissible period (!) (!) .

3. The date when the plaintiff makes up the deficient court fees should be treated as the effective date of institution for calculating subsequent procedural timelines, including the filing of the written statement (!) (!) .

4. The defendant's right to file a written statement should be calculated from this corrected date, not from the date of service of summons, especially if the defect in court fees was rectified before the expiry of the statutory period (!) (!) .

5. The order dismissing the defendant's written statement as filed beyond the statutory period was found to be illegal, as the court failed to consider the correct date of institution and the rectification of court fees (!) (!) .

6. The order was set aside, and the defendant's written statement, submitted within the permissible timeline after rectification of court fees, was allowed to be taken on record (!) .

7. The court emphasized the importance of equitable treatment for both parties, especially regarding delays caused by defects in court fee payments, whether due to oversight or bona fide reasons (!) (!) .

8. The final decision underscores that procedural errors related to court fee deficiencies, if rectified timely, should not penalize the defendant by depriving them of their right to file a written statement within the prescribed period (!) .

9. The order also mandated the payment of costs by the defendant for the delay, ensuring that procedural fairness and justice are maintained (!) .

10. Overall, the legal principles highlight that procedural timelines are to be calculated from the date of proper institution, considering any rectification of defects, rather than from the date of service of summons alone (!) (!) .

Would you like assistance in drafting legal arguments or notices based on these key points?