1: migard was earth, but i see where your coming from
True, but I would prefer to reserve the name Midgard for some other type of planet...one closer to our own.
2: the star is bigger than our own meaning that it gives out more radiation possible leathal so live like us is more than unlikely
No, the star is not larger than our own. It is a red dwarf, and red dwarfs are quite small. Now, it does output more radiation onto this planet, but for completely different reasons: the planet is far closer to its own star than we are to our sun.
3: the planet is bigger thus greater gravity would make it hard for large organisms to develop
Incorrect; we need only to look at deep-sea life in our own oceans to see why. Gravity is just one form of force, as is pressure, and as such if life can exist in the sizes they do at such deep depths where the pressure would far exceed the surface gravity of this planet, we can safely say a large organism can evolve on the planet's surface. Now, we would not be able to live on the surface of the planet for very long as the force of gravity would essentially crush our organs from the inside, but that's irrelevant.
What is not irrelevant is the radiation. While we have seen proof of bacteria surviving such raditation we might have once considered lethal, we have no evidence of multi-cellular life existing in similiarly radiated conditions, and until we do we can only conclude such life cannot exist. (This does not mean we do not investigate however; far from it, in fact. We should investigate as soon as we are technologically capable.)
thus leading me to belive that any life present will be in the upper mantle
Now that's an interesting statement...as far as I know we have no life existing in our own mantle, so I'm not seeing how life could develop in another planet's mantle...but, then again...I don't know. I'm not a biologist, so we'd have to ask one.