As far as marriage is concerned................. declaring its existance and its legal validitty ... ultimately it affects the status of at least two parties!!!!
Are you saying that Petitioner-male (so called '2nd husband') is attempting to declare the other male (so called '1st husband') as a "married person" ???????????
What's the need of all this ??? ................................................... Also to declare any person as "married" is the right of his/her spouse only ..............................................and no third person can go to court and obtain such declaratory decree !!! ................................................ that other person(petitioner-husband) is a third party to marriage(respondent-wife and respondent-her 1st husband) and has no business whatsoever.
So declaring the 'existance of marriage' ex-parte to that 1st husband is illegal ... or rather none of the business ot 2nd male in the context.
In this case, should there be element of truth in the marriage between respondent-wife and respondent-1st husband ................. then that 1st husband only should/Could have been the aggrieved party !!! ............ and not the 2nd husband (petitioner)
And for the 2nd-husband ................... there is no marriage in the eyes of law ................................ and he should not even bother to go to court and just assume himself as not married to respondent-female !!!! ... and he should not even go to court to get it null and void as it is void ab initio.