Chosen Plaintext Attack and Chosen Multiple-Plaintext Attack The original CPA game: 


The adversary gives two arbitrary messages $m_0$ and $m_1$ to a challenger; 
The challenger encrypts an arbitrary message $m_u$, $u∈\{0,1\}$ , and sends the ciphertext to the adversary;
The adversary outputs the guess $u$.


Now I give a revised version of the above CPA game:


The adversary gives two arbitrary sets of messages $M_0$ and $M_1$ to a challenger, where $|M_0|=|M_1|$, and each pair of counterparts are of equal size; 
The challenger encrypts an arbitrary set of message $M_u$, $u∈\{0,1\}$, and sends the ciphertexts to the adversary; 
The adversary outputs the guess $u$.


If a public-key encryption scheme is CPA-secure is it also secure in this revised version of CPA game?
If a public-key encryption scheme is CPA-secure is it also secure in this revised version of CPA game?


Yes, because this is essentially a trimmed down version of Left-or-Right-CPA security (PDF) which is provably equivalent to the first definition you mentioned which is also known as Find-Then-Guess-CPA security.

If your scheme is LoR-CPA secure then you can query all message pairs from the two sets to the LoR oracle and answer any remaining queries $x$ by querying $(x,x)$.

The inverse direction (that the new definition implies LoR) probably requires a Hybrid Argument as indicated in the comments to "extend" the size of the set to all queries. This should go analogous to proving that FtG-CPA security implies LoR-CPA security.