From: Rabbi Moshe Sofer
To: Unknown recipient
R. Akiva Eiger questioned why Rashi on Sotah 43b states that orlah does not apply to a single planting, given that orlah unambiguously applies to all trees. The Chasam Sofer proposes that the dispute between kerem revai and neta revai maps onto different scriptural derivations, and more fundamentally, reinterprets Rashi to mean that such a tree's fruit is perpetually subject to revai-style redemption obligations rather than being outright forbidden as orlah forever.
Source: Shu"t Chasam Sofer YD §285