What is the ruling on reselling a utility (such as electricity or internet) that has been purchased, knowing that the original owner stipulates that it not be resold? And does the utility become the property of the buyer after payment, such that he is permitted to dispose of it?

Scholars differ concerning the ruling on selling an asset and its usufruct on condition that the buyer does not sell it to another, or that the lessee does not personally utilize the usufruct. Some validate the contract and invalidate the condition, while others invalidate both. Some validate both if the condition benefits the seller or the sold item. The majority, however, absolutely invalidate the condition. We have previously favored the view that it is not permissible for the lessee to sublease to another if the lessor stipulates this.