Yes sir, actually both names are pointing towards the same plant but I
believe there is some mistake on both links.
Arisaema murrayi (J.Graham) Hook. -- Bot. Mag. 74: t.4388. 1848.
Arisaema murrayi Hook. & Blatt. -- J. Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 26:
365, descr. emend. 1931.
In the second name most probably Blatter has added some more points
to the description hence it is mentioned, but with reference to
botanical nomenclature, first one should be accepted second is just an
additional information.
By the way this is endemic to South India.
Pankaj
> While wanting to compile common names for *Arisaema murrayi ... *the basic
> exercise of settling on the botanical name came to these two instances:
>
> 1) ... *Arisaema murrayi *Hooker Hook. ex Blatter ...
http://www.aroid.org/genera/arisaema/herold/Pages/arlist.php...
> International Aroid Society
> 2) ... *Arisaema murrayi *(J.Graham) Hook. ... syn.: *Arum murrayi* J.Graham
> ...
http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/kew-15524...The Plants List