Chalam,
I can't tell if there is any disagreement here or not. As I understand the New Testament, a person receives the Holy Spirit and is born again in response to faith in Jesus as the Christ, Son of God in the flesh (1 John). I do not see that this has to be accompanied by speaking in tongues. The presence of the Holy Spirit can be manifested in many ways, not always so spectacular.
There are problems with making doctrine out of the events in Acts:
-There is no mention of tongues accompanying most conversions mentioned. Maybe it's an argument from silence, but wouldn't it have been important enough to mention if it happened?
-Whenever tongues accompanied conversion, at least one apostle was involved. You would have to say that it would be necessary to have an apostle to lay hands on someone for this to happen which is impossible today since the apostles have been gone for 1900 years.
-In the particular scripture you referred to, Acts 19, the Ephesians only knew of John the Baptist and the baptism of repentance—they didn't even know of Jesus.